Childhood Pancreatitis and Risk for Incident Diabetes in Adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The relationship between acute pancreatitis and incident diabetes is unclear. We assessed whether a resolved single event of acute pancreatitis in childhood was associated with incident diabetes in adulthood. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS A nationwide, population-based study of 1,802,110 Israeli adolescents (mean age 17.4 years [range 16–20]) who were examined before compulsory military service between 1979 and 2008 and whose data were linked to the Israeli National Diabetes Registry (INDR). Resolved pancreatitis was defined as a history of a single event of acute pancreatitis with normal pancreatic function at enrollment. Logistic regression analysis was applied. RESULTS Incident diabetes developed in 4.6% of subjects with resolved pancreatitis (13 of 281; none of these cases were identified as type 1 diabetes) and 2.5% among the unexposed group (44,463 of 1,801,716). Resolved acute pancreatitis was associated with incident diabetes with an odds ratio (OR) of 2.23 (95% CI 1.25–3.98) with adjustment for age, sex, and birth year. Findings persisted after further adjustments for baseline BMI and sociodemographic confounders (OR 2.10 [95% CI 1.15–3.84]). Childhood pancreatitis was associated with a diagnosis of diabetes at a younger age, with 92% of diabetes case subjects diagnosed before 40 years of age compared with 47% in the unexposed group (P = 0.002). The association accentuated when the study sample was limited to individuals of unimpaired health or normal BMI at baseline. CONCLUSIONS A history of acute pancreatitis in childhood with normal pancreatic function in late adolescence is a risk factor for incident type 2 diabetes, especially at young adulthood.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".