MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2948510046 · doi:10.2337/db19-394-p

394-P: Nonsevere Hypoglycemia Treatment in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: A Validation Study of Carbohydrate Intake at Different Glucose Thresholds

2019· article· en· W2948510046 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nadine Taleb, Virginie Messier, Valérie Parent, Danijela Bovan, Anne‐Sophie Brazeau, Rémi Rabasa‐Lhoret

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiet and metabolism studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypoglycemiaMedicineContext (archaeology)Diabetes mellitusPlasma glucoseCarbohydrateType 2 diabetesInternal medicineInsulinType 1 diabetesEndocrinologyGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: For nonsevere hypoglycemia (NS-H), treatment guidelines recommend 15-20g of rapidly absorbed carbohydrates (CHO) and repeat intake at 15 min until recovery (glucose above 70 mg/dL). The adequacy of this one size fits all approach is questioned. Our group reported an average intake of 32 ± 24g CHO in a type 1 diabetes (T1D) outpatient study. We aim to validate N-SH treatment guidelines in the context of modern therapies. Methods: Randomized four way cross-over trial to assess treatment with 16g vs. 32 g CHO (glucose tablets) for fasting subcutaneous insulin induced NS-H at two glucose thresholds: a) below 54 mg/dL and b) between 54 to 63 mg/dL. Plasma glucose is measured every 5 min till recovery then at 15-30 min intervals. Results: Preliminary data was collected for 12 of 33 subjects (53.2 ± 16.8 years old, 58.3% females, HbA1c 56 ± 7.7 mmol/mol, diabetes duration 31.9 ± 15.8 years). Comparison of 16 vs. 32g CHO for each threshold revealed the following change in glucose 15 min post treatment (primary outcome): a) below 54 mg/dL: 12.0 ± 21.8 vs. 17.6± 28.4 mg/dL, p=0.4; b) between 54 to 63 mg/dL: -1.6 ± 19.7 vs. 12 ± 22.7 mg/dL, p=0.06; time needed to recovery (above70 mg/dL): a) below 54 mg/dL: 30 ± 13.6 vs. 29.6 ±14.4 min, p= 0.9; b) between 54 to 63 mg/dL: 37.5 ±14.4 vs. 28.7 ± 17.2 min, p= 0.1 and time needed for disappearance of symptoms: a) below 54 mg/dL: 27.8± 22.3 vs. 22.8 ± 9.5 min, p=0.8; b) between 54 to 63 mg/dL: 24.2 ± 10.7 vs. 16.7± 11.5 min, p=0.5. Regression analysis will be conducted to study response predictors (plasma insulin and catecholamines levels, body composition, etc.) Conclusion: The response to nonsevere hypoglycemia treatment is extremely variable. A one size fits all recommendation is unlikely to be appropriate. Data of this trial will add to the knowledge of hypoglycemia treatment in T1D. Disclosure N. Taleb: None. V. Messier: Other Relationship; Self; Eli Lilly and Company. V. Parent: None. D. Bovan: None. A. Brazeau: None. R. Rabasa-Lhoret: Advisory Panel; Self; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Lilly Diabetes, Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi. Research Support; Self; AstraZeneca, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Novo Nordisk A/S. Funding Canadian Institutes of Health Research (354024); JDRF (4-SRA-2018-651-Q-R)

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetesSame topicDiet and metabolism studiesFrench-language works237,207