MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Androgen Therapy in Male Patients Suffering from Type 2 Diabetes: A Review of Benefits and Risks

2018· review· en· W2888508986 on OpenAlexaff
Mortaza Fatehi Hassanabad, Mohammad Fatehi

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Diabetes Reviews · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal and reproductive studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineType 2 diabetesDiabetes mellitusTestosterone (patch)Sexual functionPopulationSexual dysfunctionInternal medicineIntensive care medicineEndocrinologyBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The current estimated numbers of patients with Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) is believed to be close to 10% of the whole populations of many geographical regions, causing serious concerns over the resulting elevated morbidity and mortality as well as the impact on health care systems around the world. In addition to negatively affecting the quality of life, diabetes is associated with cardiovascular and cerebrovascular complications, indicating that appropriate drug therapy should not only deal with metabolic dysfunction but also protect the vascular system, kidney function and skeletal muscle mass from the effects of the epigenetic changes induced by hyperglycaemia. OBJECTIVE: To provide an insight into the management of hypogonadism associated with T2D, this review focuses on clinical observations related to androgen therapy in qualified diabetic patients, and discusses the lines of evidence for its benefits and risks. The potential interactions of testosterone with medicines used by patients with T2D will also be discussed. CONCLUSION: From recent clinical findings, it became evident that a considerable percentage of patients suffering from T2D manifested low serum testosterone and experienced diminished sexual activity, as well as reduced skeletal muscle mass and lower bone density. Although there are some controversies, Testosterone Replacement Therapy (TRT) for this particular population of patients appears to be beneficial overall only if it is implemented carefully and monitored regularly.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.185
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Diabetes ReviewsSame topicHormonal and reproductive studiesFrench-language works237,207