MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2406649600 · doi:10.4239/wjd.v6.i17.1323

Skeletal muscle as a therapeutic target for delaying type 1 diabetic complications

2015· review· en· W2406649600 on OpenAlexaff
Samantha K. Coleman

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Diabetes · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDiabetes and associated disorders
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSkeletal muscleDiabetes mellitusInsulinDiseaseType 1 diabetesBioinformaticsType 2 diabetesInternal medicineEndocrinologyIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is a chronic autoimmune disease targeting the pancreatic beta-cells and rendering the person hypoinsulinemic and hyperglycemic. Despite exogenous insulin therapy, individuals with T1DM will invariably develop long-term complications such as blindness, kidney failure and cardiovascular disease. Though often overlooked, skeletal muscle is also adversely affected in T1DM, with both physical and metabolic derangements reported. As the largest metabolic organ in the body, impairments to skeletal muscle health in T1DM would impact insulin sensitivity, glucose/lipid disposal and basal metabolic rate and thus affect the ability of persons with T1DM to manage their disease. In this review, we discuss the impact of T1DM on skeletal muscle health with a particular focus on the proposed mechanisms involved. We then identify and discuss established and potential adjuvant therapies which, in association with insulin therapy, would improve the health of skeletal muscle in those with T1DM and thereby improve disease management- ultimately delaying the onset and severity of other long-term diabetic complications.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations64
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of DiabetesSame topicDiabetes and associated disordersFrench-language works237,207