MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162937566 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.060607

Suitability of recommended limits for fasting glucose tests in women with polycystic ovary syndrome

2007· article· en· W2162937566 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Claudia Gagnon, Jean‐Patrice Baillargeon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian function and disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolycystic ovaryMedicineCutoffInternal medicineGlucose tolerance testImpaired glucose toleranceConfidence intervalEndocrinologyOvaryDiabetes mellitusGastroenterologyGynecologyInsulin resistance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Canadian and American Diabetes Associations recommend the use of an oral glucose tolerance test to screen for abnormal glucose tolerance among women with polycystic ovary syndrome when their fasting plasma glucose level is 5.7 mmol/L or more (Canadian guideline) and 5.6 mmol/L or more (American). Our objective was to determine the predictive value of 5.6 mmol/L as a fasting plasma glucose cutoff for detecting abnormal glucose tolerance in women with polycystic ovary syndrome, and then to define the optimal cutoff for this population. METHODS: An oral glucose tolerance test was administered to 105 consecutive women with polycystic ovary syndrome referred to an academic reproductive endocrine clinic. We calculated sensitivity, specificity and likelihood ratios. RESULTS: The sensitivity of a 5.6 mmol/L cutoff was 48% (95% confidence interval [CI] 30%-67%); its specificity, 98.7% (95% CI 96.1%-100%). With this cutoff, 52% of women with polycystic ovary syndrome whose glucose tolerance is abnormal would be missed. The prevalence of abnormal glucose tolerance was 28%, with a positive predictive value of 93% (95% CI 81%-100%) and a negative predictive value of 83% (95% CI 76%-91%). The likelihood ratio for a positive test was 36.7 (95% CI 5.0-267), and for a negative test, 0.5 (95% CI 0.4-0.7). The optimal fasting plasma glucose cutoff value was 5.0 mmol/L, with a 79% sensitivity (95% CI 65%-94%) and 66% specificity (95% CI 55%-77%). If this cutoff were used, 24% of women with abnormal glucose tolerance would still be missed. INTERPRETATION: The Canadian and American recommendations--of screening for abnormal glucose tolerance with an oral glucose tolerance test only when the results of a fasting plasma glucose test are 5.7 mmol/L (or 5.6 mmol/L) or more--are inappropriate for women with polycystic ovary syndrome. We therefore recommend that all women with polycystic ovary syndrome have an oral glucose tolerance test.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.160
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.160
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicOvarian function and disordersFrench-language works237,207