MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092224625 · doi:10.1007/s00125-020-05263-9

Glucose management for exercise using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and intermittently scanned CGM (isCGM) systems in type 1 diabetes: position statement of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) and of the International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes (ISPAD) endorsed by JDRF and supported by the American Diabetes Association (ADA)

2020· article· en· W3092224625 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetologia · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Clinical Research InstituteCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalDiabetes CanadaYork University
FundersMerck Sharp and DohmeMedizinische Universität GrazRoche Diabetes CareServierKarl-Franzens-Universität GrazAbbott Diabetes CareSwansea UniversityNewcastle UniversityKing's College LondonNovo NordiskMylanDexcomNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchEuropean CommissionMedizinische Universität InnsbruckUniversität InnsbruckKing's College Hospital NHS Foundation TrustMannKind CorporationPfizerInsulet CorporationBayer HealthCareSanofiAmgenAstraZenecaEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsContinuous glucose monitoringMedicineDiabetes mellitusType 2 diabetesPosition statementHuman physiologyDiabetes managementBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringType 1 diabetesHealth professionalsType 2 Diabetes MellitusPhysical exerciseIntensive care medicinePhysical therapyInternal medicineEndocrinologyHealth careFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.248 · 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