Intensive insulin therapy reduced cardiovascular disease in type 1 diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
TherapeuticsMay 1, 2006Intensive insulin therapy reduced cardiovascular disease in type 1 diabetesHertzel C. Gerstein, MDHertzel C. Gerstein, MDMcMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada (H.C.G.)Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/ACPJC-2006-144-3-063 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack Citations ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail Source CitationNathan DM, Cleary PA, Backlund JC, et al. Intensive diabetes treatment and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:2643-53. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16371630Clinical Impact RatingsGIM/FP/GP: Cardiology: Endocrinology: Reference1 Buse JB, Rosenstock J. Prevention of cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes mellitus: trials on the horizon. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am. 2005;34:221-35. [PMID: 15752929] Google Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada (H.C.G.) PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails May 1, 2006Volume 144, Issue 3Page: 63KeywordsAnginaBloodBlood pressureCardiovascular diseasesCholesterolEndocrinologyEpidemiologyGlucoseHbA1cHemoglobinHypertensionInsulinMyocardial infarctionPatientsResearch laboratoriesRevascularizationStrokeType 1 diabetesType 2 diabetes ePublished: 9 March 2020 Issue Published: May 1, 2006 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2006 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".