Association of Diabetes and Prognosis of Minor Stroke and Its Subtypes: A Prospective Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The association between diabetes mellitus (DM) and prognosis of minor stroke is unclear. The aim of this study is to investigate whether DM contributes to the prognosis of minor stroke or its specific subtype. METHODS: All minor ischemic stroke patients were derived from the China National Stroke Registry and classified into 5 subtypes according to the TOAST (Trial of Org 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment) criteria. DM was defined as either self-reported physician diagnosis of diabetes or use of hypoglycemic medications during hospitalization or at discharge. Patients were followed up for 1 year for clinical outcomes of recurrent stroke, death and functional outcome. Poor functional outcomes were defined as a score of 2-6 for modified Rankin Score. Associations between DM and prognosis of minor stroke and its subtypes were analyzed by univariable and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 4,548 patients with minor stroke, 1,230(27.0%) patients had DM, 1,038(22.8%) had poor outcomes and 570(13.0%) of 4,401 patients had recurrent stroke at 1 year. In multivariable analyses, DM were significantly associated with 1-year stroke recurrence (Odds Ratio [OR], 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08-1.59) and poor outcome (OR, 1.51; 95%CI: 1.28-1.77). Among the subtypes of minor stroke, DM was only significantly associated with 1-year stroke recurrence (OR, 1.63; 95%CI: 1.07-2.50) and poor outcome (OR, 1.73; 95%CI: 1.22-2.45) in the small-artery occlusion subtype. CONCLUSIONS: DM significantly increased the risk of stroke recurrence and poor outcome in the small-artery occlusion subtype, but not in other subtypes of minor stroke.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".