MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332027923 · doi:10.1136/ebm-2011-100076

Continuous glucose monitoring in children and adults with well-controlled type 1 diabetes reduces hypoglycaemia

2011· letter· en· W2332027923 on OpenAlexaff
Breay W. Paty

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Medicine · 2011
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHypoglycemiaType 1 diabetesContinuous glucose monitoringDiabetes mellitusType 2 diabetesInternal medicineGastroenterologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Commentary on: Battelino T, Phillip M, Bratina N, et al. Effect of continuous glucose monitoring on hypoglycemia in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2011;34:795–800.[OpenUrl][1][Abstract/FREE Full Text][2] Hypoglycaemia is the primary limiting factor in the glycaemic management of diabetes.1 This is especially true of individuals with long-standing type 1 diabetes, who are at highest risk of severe hypoglycaemia due to the loss of counter-regulatory hormone responses and hypoglycaemic symptom awareness. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), using a subcutaneous sensor to frequently measure interstitial glucose, was developed as a tool for improving glycaemic control and reducing hypoglycaemia in diabetes. Recent studies have shown that real-time CGM can improve haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c)3 and reduce the duration of hyperglycaemia or hypoglycaemia over short periods in selected individuals.4 However, inherent problems have limited its effective use, … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DDiabetes%2BCare%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.2337%252Fdc10-1989%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F21335621%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/ijlink?linkType=ABST&journalCode=diacare&resid=34/4/795&atom=%2Febmed%2F17%2F1%2F18.atom

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0170.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.012

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designObservational · Not applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based MedicineSame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207