MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2640356074 · doi:10.1111/dme.13404

Markedly increased incidence of critical illness in adults with Type 1 diabetes

2017· article· en· W2640356074 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ruth Ann Marrie, Elizabeth Sellers, H. Chen, Randy Fransoo, Çharles N. Bernstein, Carol Hitchon, Christine Peschken, Allan Garland

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetic Medicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDiabetes and associated disorders
Canadian institutionsResearch ManitobaHealth Sciences CentreManitoba HealthChildren's Hospital Research Institute of ManitobaUniversity of Manitoba
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioIntensive care unitIncidence (geometry)PopulationDiabetes mellitusType 2 diabetesProportional hazards modelDiabetic ketoacidosisCohortRate ratioCohort studyType 1 diabetesPediatricsInternal medicineConfidence intervalEndocrinologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: To compare the incidence of and mortality after intensive care unit admission in adults with paediatric-onset Type 1 diabetes vs the general population. METHODS: Using population-based administrative data from Manitoba, Canada, we identified 814 cases of paediatric-onset Type 1 diabetes, and 3579 general population controls matched on age, sex and region of residence. We estimated the incidence of intensive care unit admission in adulthood, and compared the findings between populations using incidence rate ratios and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusting for age, sex, comorbidity and socio-economic status. We estimated age- and sex-standardized mortality rates after intensive care unit admission. RESULTS: Between January 2000 and October 2009, the average annual incidence of intensive care unit admission among prevalent cohorts was 910 per 100 000 in the Type 1 diabetes population, and 106 per 100 000 in matched controls, an eightfold increased risk (incidence rate ratio 8.6; 95% CI 5.5, 14.0). The adjusted risk of intensive care unit admission was elevated to a greater extent among women with Type 1 diabetes compared with matched women (hazard ratio 14.7; 95% CI 7.2, 29.4) than among men with Type 1 diabetes compared with matched men (hazard ratio 4.92; 95% CI 10.3, 2.36) The most common reasons for admission in the diabetes cohort were diabetic ketoacidosis, infection and ischaemic heart disease. At 30%, 5-year mortality was higher in the diabetes cohort than in the matched cohort (relative risk 5.7; 95% CI 1.2, 8.9). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the general population, the risk of intensive care unit admission was higher in adults with paediatric-onset Type 1 diabetes, and mortality after admission was also higher.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.441

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetic MedicineSame topicDiabetes and associated disordersFrench-language works237,207