Diabetes in south Asians: etiology and the complexities of care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fifteen to twenty percent of south Asians will develop type 2 diabetes mellitus. This extremely high prevalence of diabetes is seen in both south Asians living in developed countries and in south Asians who are living in either urban or rural south Asia. South Asians have specific diabetic risk factors resulting from a tendency to develop metabolically active abdominal fat, resulting in a poor lipid profile even at a low body mass index. They are also particularly vulnerable to microvascular and macrovascular diabetic complications including renal and cardiac disease. The increased prevalence of diabetes in south Asians is likely due to a combination of biological and cultural factors. Targeting these factors is the only way to provide effective education, prevention, screening, and treatment to south Asians. Culturally focused community programs and interprofessional care teams are two health care paradigms that have been successful in helping them manage this chronic illness. Continuing culturally targeted care and education programs is necessary to reduce the prevalence and complications of diabetes in south Asian communities.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".