Changes Over Time in Uric Acid in Relation to Changes in Insulin Sensitivity, Beta-Cell Function, and Glycemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Serum uric acid has been linked to risk of type 2 diabetes (T2DM), but debate persists as to whether it plays a causal role. Indeed, it is unclear if changes in uric acid relate to the pathophysiologic determinants of T2DM (insulin resistance, beta-cell dysfunction), as would be expected if causal. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of changes in uric acid over 2 years on changes in insulin sensitivity, beta-cell function, and glycemia in women with and without recent gestational diabetes (GDM), a model of the early natural history of T2DM. DESIGN/SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: At both 1 and 3 years postpartum, 299 women (96 with recent GDM) underwent uric acid measurement and oral glucose tolerance tests that enabled assessment of insulin sensitivity/resistance (Matsuda index, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance [HOMA-IR]), beta-cell function (insulin secretion-sensitivity index-2 [ISSI-2], insulinogenic index/HOMA-IR [IGI/HOMA-IR]), and glucose tolerance. RESULTS: Women with recent GDM had higher serum uric acid than their peers at both 1 year (281 ± 69 vs 262 ± 58 µmol/L, P = 0.01) and 3 years postpartum (271 ± 59 vs 256 ± 55 µmol/L, P = 0.03), coupled with lower insulin sensitivity, poorer beta-cell function, and greater glycemia (all P < 0.05). However, on fully adjusted analyses, neither uric acid at 1 year nor its change from 1 to 3 years was independently associated with any of the following metabolic outcomes at 3 years postpartum: Matsuda index, HOMA-IR, ISSI-2, IGI/HOMA-IR, fasting glucose, 2-hour glucose, or glucose intolerance. CONCLUSION: Serum uric acid does not track with changes over time in insulin sensitivity, beta-cell function, or glycemia in women with recent GDM, providing evidence against causality in its association with diabetes.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".