Markedly increased incidence of critical illness in adults with Type 1 diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".