Rising Thyroid Disorders Among Type 2 Diabetic Mellitus Patients: Case-Control Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The objective of study to explore the association between thyroid dysfunction and Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) related to family history and co-morbid conditions.METHODS: This was a case and control study, 762 T2DM patients and 762 control study participants were enrolled, aged between 25 and 65 years. The study based on biochemistry parameters included: fasting blood glucose levels (FBG), glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), serum cholesterol, triglycerides, high density lipoprotein (HDL), low density lipoprotein (LDL), thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH), T3, and T4.RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences between T2DM patients and control subjects regarding BMI, physical activity, smoking, metabolic syndrome, hypertension, family history thyroid nodules, and number of sleeping hours. The study found statistically significant differences between T2DM and control subjects on calcium (p=0.028), magnesium (p<0.001), potassium (p<0.001), phosphorous (p=0.038), fasting blood glucose (p<0.001), HbA1c (p<0.001), LDL (p=0.002), albumin (p<0.001), billirubin (p=0.015), triglyceride (p<0.001), SBP (p=0.009) and, DBP (p=0.002), TSH (p<0.001), T3 (p<0.001), and T4 (p<0.001). There were statistically significant differences between subjects with and those without thyroid nodules for calcium (p<0.001), magnesium (p<0.001), phosphorous (p=0.022), HDL (p=0.050), TSH (p<0.001), T3 (p<0.001), and T4 (p<0.001). Multivariable stepwise logistic regression analysis showed that TSH mIU/L ( <0.001), HbA1c ( p< 0.001), family history of thyroid (p< 0.001), Waist circumference, (p<0.001), SBP mmHg (p= 0.002), [DBP mmHg ( p= 0.003), BMI (p= 0.006), Serum Calcium level (mmol/L) (p <0.001], and family history of DM ( p= 0.015) were considered at higher risk as a predictors of thyroid amongT2DM patients.CONCLUSION: The study found a high prevalence of thyroid dysfunction in Turkish T2DM patients compared to the general population. This study suggests that obesity, HbA1c, the environment, and genetic susceptibility among T2DM, may increase the risk of thyroid disease and cancer.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".