Prognosis of Ischemic Stroke With Newly Diagnosed Diabetes Mellitus According to Hemoglobin A1c Criteria in Chinese Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was recommended to diagnose diabetes mellitus, but whether newly diagnosed diabetes mellitus (NDDM) according to the new criteria was associated with stroke prognosis was unclear. We aimed to investigate the prognosis of ischemic stroke with NDDM according to the new criteria. METHODS: Ischemic stroke without a diabetes mellitus history in the survey on Abnormal Glucose Regulation in Patients With Acute Stroke Across China were included in the analysis. NDDM was defined as fasting plasma glucose ≥7.0 mmol/L, 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test ≥11.1 mmol/L, or HbA1c ≥6.5%, and NDDM was divided into group 1, diagnosed by glucose criteria (fasting plasma glucose ≥7.0 mmol/L or 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test ≥11.1 mmol/L with/without HbA1c ≥6.5%), or group 2, diagnosed by single high HbA1c (fasting plasma glucose <7.0 mmol/L, 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test <11.1 mmol/L, and HbA1c ≥6.5%). The association between NDDM and 1-year prognosis (mortality, stroke recurrence, and poor functional outcome [modified Rankin scale score 3-6]) was estimated. RESULTS: Among 1251 ischemic stroke patients, 539 were NDDM and 141 of NDDM with single high HbA1c. NDDM was an independent risk factor for 1-year mortality (hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence interval, 1.001-1.26), stroke recurrence (hazard ratio, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.28), and poor functional outcome (odds ratio, 2.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.95-3.43) compared with non-diabetes mellitus. Nevertheless, NDDM with single high HbA1c was not significantly associated with 1-year prognosis for all end points (P>0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: NDDM by new criteria was associated with poor prognosis at 1 year after ischemic stroke; however, NDDM with single high HbA1c did not predict a poor prognosis.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".