[Optimizing the managment of patients with diabetes mellitus: selected clinical trials from the 2004 Congress of the American Diabetes Association].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 64th scientific congress of the American Diabetes Association had a special session devoted to the presentation of the results from three clinical trials: 1) the first multicentre international trial of pancreatic islet transplantation according to the so-called Edmonton protocol with the primary endpoint of restoring insulin independence in type 1 diabetic patients; 2) three pivotal studies of 30 weeks testing both the efficacy and safety of exenatide (exendin-4), a new insulin secretagogue that is a long-acting analogue of glucagon-like peptide-1, in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with either metformin, or a sulfonylurea, or a metformin-sulfonylurea combination; and 3) the "Collaborative AtoRvastatin Diabetes Study" (CARDS), a placebo-controlled primary prevention trial of cardiovascular complications using atorvastatin 10 mg in 2 838 at risk patients with type 2 diabetes. The main results and conclusions of these trials are briefly presented as they open new perspectives in the management of patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".