MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2205010449 · doi:10.2337/dc15-1676

Cardiovascular and Other Outcomes Postintervention With Insulin Glargine and Omega-3 Fatty Acids (ORIGINALE)

2015· article· en· W2205010449 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes Care · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFatty Acid Research and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSt. Jude MedicalH. Lundbeck A/SMitsubishi Tanabe Pharma CorporationGeneral Hospital of People’s Liberation ArmySanofiUniversitätsspital ZürichUniversitetet i OsloBiosense WebsterNovo NordiskSemmelweis EgyetemKarolinska InstitutetAbbott DiagnosticsServierIndia Diabetes Research FoundationBristol-Myers SquibbUniversity of LeicesterUniversity of Cape TownUniversidad de La FronteraUniversidad de GuadalajaraBoston Scientific CorporationMcMaster UniversityYale UniversityMcGill UniversityUniversity of OttawaGlaxoSmithKlineAmgenPfizerEli Lilly and CompanyAstraZenecaUniversity of Washington
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioInsulin glargineInternal medicineMyocardial infarctionDiabetes mellitusStroke (engine)PlaceboRandomizationType 2 diabetesRandomized controlled trialGastroenterologyEndocrinologyConfidence intervalPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The Outcome Reduction With Initial Glargine Intervention (ORIGIN) trial reported neutral effects of insulin glargine on cardiovascular outcomes and cancers and reduced incident diabetes in high-cardiovascular risk adults with dysglycemia after 6.2 years of active treatment. Omega-3 fatty acids had neutral effects on cardiovascular outcomes. The ORIGIN and Legacy Effects (ORIGINALE) study measured posttrial effects of these interventions during an additional 2.7 years. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Surviving ORIGIN participants attended up to two additional visits. The hazard of clinical outcomes during the entire follow-up period from randomization was calculated. RESULTS: Of 12,537 participants randomized, posttrial data were analyzed for 4,718 originally allocated to insulin glargine (2,351) versus standard care (2,367), and 4,771 originally allocated to omega-3 fatty acid supplements (2,368) versus placebo (2,403). Posttrial, small differences in median HbA1c persisted (glargine 6.6% [49 mmol/mol], standard care 6.7% [50 mmol/mol], P = 0.025). From randomization to the end of posttrial follow-up, no differences were found between the glargine and standard care groups in myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death (1,185 vs. 1,165 events; hazard ratio 1.01 [95% CI 0.94-1.10]; P = 0.72); myocardial infarction, stroke, cardiovascular death, revascularization, or hospitalization for heart failure (1,958 vs. 1,910 events; 1.03 [0.97-1.10]; P = 0.38); or any cancer (524 vs. 529 events; 0.99 [0.88-1.12]; P = 0.91) or between omega-3 and placebo groups in cardiovascular death (688 vs. 700; 0.98 [0.88-1.09]; P = 0.68) or other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: During >6 years of treatment followed by >2.5 years of observation, insulin glargine had neutral effects on health outcomes and salutary effects on metabolic control, whereas omega-3 fatty acid supplementation had no effect.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations66
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetes CareSame topicFatty Acid Research and HealthFrench-language works237,207