MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338620680 · doi:10.1176/appi.focus.20150040

Deconstructing Diabetes and Depression: Clinical Context, Treatment Strategies, and New Directions

2016· article· en· W2338620680 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan M. Gregory, Joshua D. Rosenblat, Roger S. McIntyre

Bibliographic record

VenueFOCUS The Journal of Lifelong Learning in Psychiatry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDepression (economics)Diabetes mellitusContext (archaeology)GlycemicMedicineInsulin resistancePsychological interventionPsychosocialType 2 diabetesMoodPsychiatryEndocrinologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depression and diabetes are common, chronic, and frequently comorbid diseases that contribute substantially to global disability and mortality. Their relationship is bidirectional: depression increases the risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and diabetes increases the risk of depression. Unhealthy lifestyles and poor self-care by patients with depression contribute to the increased T2DM risk. The psychosocial burden of a diabetes diagnosis and its eventual complications predispose diabetic patients to depressive symptoms. Neuroendocrine alterations and inflammation may underlie the increased risk of T2DM in depression but are also proposed as common causative factors for both illnesses. Screening for depression is essential in T2DM, and vice versa. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors effectively treat depression of patients with diabetes and positively influence glycemic control. Psychological interventions are effective for depressive symptoms, but their effect on glycemic control varies. Novel depression interventions targeting inflammation or insulin resistance underscore the common biological underpinnings of mood and metabolism.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0040.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFOCUS The Journal of Lifelong Learning in PsychiatrySame topicDiabetes Management and EducationFrench-language works237,207