Glycemic Control Rate in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes Treated at a Public Tertiary Referral Hospital in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The incidence of type 1 diabetes (T1D) has been increasing worldwide, leading to a serious public health problem resulting in reduced life expectancy and increased morbidity. The aim of this study was to determine the glycemic control rate and its demographic and clinical factors, in T1D followed up at a tertiary referral hospital in Brazil. Methods: An observational and retrospective study was conducted between October 2014 and October 2015. Data were obtained from 140 medical records. Results: Satisfactory glycemic control rate was found in 22.14% of patients. There was no difference between the pediatric group and adult group regarding control rate. However, a worse HbA1C level was found in the pediatric group (P = 0.001). The use of long-acting insulin analogue (P = 0.03) was associated with satisfactory glycemic control, and a tendency was observed for both the combination of long-acting and ultra-rapid acting analogues (P = 0.08), and the absence of ketoacidosis during the course of diabetes (P = 0.08). In the group with satisfactory glycemic control, the median number of consultations (1 (1 - 4)) was significantly lower than in the uncontrolled group (2 (1 - 4)) (P = 0.003). Regarding the two major microvascular complications, 23.53% had retinopathy and 12.09% had nephropathy. Conclusions: The majority of patients did not obtain a satisfactory HbA1C level. Good glycemic control factors were directly associated with the use of long-acting insulin analogues, and the combination of long-acting and ultra-rapid analogues as well as the absence of ketoacidosis during T1D’s evolution tended also to be associated with better metabolic control. J Endocrinol Metab. 2016;6(5):135-142 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/jem369w
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".