HbA1c, lipid profiles and risk of incident type 2 Diabetes in United States Veterans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
United States Veterans are at excess risk for type 2 diabetes, but population differentials in risk have not been characterized. We determined risk of type 2 diabetes in relation to prediabetes and dyslipidemic profiles in Veterans at the VA New York Harbor (VA NYHHS) during 2004-2014. Prediabetes was based on American Diabetes Association hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) testing cut-points, one of several possible criteria used to define prediabetes. We evaluated transition to type 2 diabetes in 4,297 normoglycemic Veterans and 7,060 Veterans with prediabetes. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to relate HbA1c levels, lipid profiles, demographic, anthropometric and comorbid cardiovascular factors to incident diabetes (Hazard Ratio [HR] and 95% confidence intervals). Compared to normoglycemic Veterans (HbA1c: 5.0-5.6%; 31-38 mmol/mol), risks for diabetes were >2-fold in the moderate prediabetes risk group (HbA1c: 5.7-5.9%; 39-41 mmol/mol) (HR 2.37 [1.98-2.85]) and >5-fold in the high risk prediabetes group (HbA1c: 6.0-6.4%; 42-46 mmol/mol) (HR 5.59 [4.75-6.58]). Risks for diabetes were increased with elevated VLDL (≥40mg/dl; HR 1.31 [1.09-1.58]) and TG/HDL (≥1.5mg/dl; HR 1.34 [1.12-1.59]), and decreased with elevated HDL (≥35mg/dl; HR 0.80 [0.67-0.96]). Transition to diabetes in Veterans was related in age-stratified risk score analyses to HbA1c, VLDL, HDL and TG/HDL, BMI, hypertension and race, with 5-year risk differentials of 62% for the lowest (5-year risk, 13.5%) vs. the highest quartile (5-year risk, 21.9%) of the risk score. This investigation identified substantial differentials in risk of diabetes in Veterans, based on a readily-derived risk score suitable for risk stratification for type 2 diabetes prevention.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".