MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2591839018 · doi:10.1177/0148607117697934

Defining and Using Preoperative Predictors of Diabetic Remission Following Bariatric Surgery

2017· article· en· W2591839018 on OpenAlexafffund
Ryan Stallard, Vic Sahai, John Drover, Shannon Chun, Christian Keresztes

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBariatric Surgery and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthQueen's UniversityHotel Dieu Hospital
FundersBourns College of Engineering, University of California, RiversideHealth CanadaNestlé Health Science
KeywordsMedicineLogistic regressionGlycemicSleeve gastrectomyDiabetes mellitusPopulationRetrospective cohort studyCohortSurgeryGastric bypassReceiver operating characteristicInternal medicineWeight lossObesity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Diabetes remission is defined as the return of glycemic control in the absence of medication or insulin use after bariatric surgery. We sought to identify and assess the clinical utility of a predictive model for remission of type 2 diabetes mellitus in a population seeking bariatric surgery. METHOD: A retrospective cohort design was applied to presurgical data on patients referred for Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or vertical sleeve gastrectomy (VSG). The model developed from logistic regression was compared with a published model through receiver operating characteristic analyses. RESULTS: At 12 months postoperatively, 59.7% of the cohort was remitted, with no differences between RYGB and VSG. Logistic regression analyses yielded a model in which 4 preoperative variables reliably predicted remission. A Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test result of 0.204 indicated good fit of the developed prediction model to our outcome data. The predictive accuracy of this prediction model was compared with a published model, and an associated variation with diabetes years was substituted for age in our patient population. Our model was the most accurate. CONCLUSIONS: Using these predictors, healthcare providers may be able to better counsel patients who are living with diabetes and considering bariatric surgery on the likelihood of achieving remission from the intervention. This refined prediction model requires further testing in a larger sample to evaluate its external validity.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Parenteral and Enteral NutritionSame topicBariatric Surgery and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207