MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118874084 · doi:10.1016/j.metop.2021.100078

Oral minimal model-based estimates of insulin sensitivity in obese youth depend on oral glucose tolerance test protocol duration

2021· article· en· W3118874084 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kai Bartlette, Anne‐Marie Carreau, Danielle Xie, Yesenia Garcia‐Reyes, Haseeb Rahat, Laura Pyle, Kristen J. Nadeau, Melanie Cree‐Green, Cecilia Diniz Behn

Bibliographic record

VenueMetabolism Open · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Science FoundationNational Institutes of HealthDiabetes CanadaEndocrine SocietyDoris Duke Charitable Foundation
KeywordsInsulin sensitivityDuration (music)Protocol (science)MedicineSensitivity (control systems)Test (biology)InsulinInternal medicineEndocrinologyInsulin resistanceBiologyEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Oral Minimal Model (OMM), a differential-equations based mathematical model of glucose-insulin dynamics, utilizes data from a frequently sampled oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) to quantify insulin sensitivity (SI). OMM-based estimates of SI can detect differences in insulin resistance (IR) across population groups and quantify effects of clinical or behavioral interventions. These estimates of SI have been validated in healthy adults using data from OGTTs with durations from 2 to 7 h. However, data demonstrating how protocol duration affects SI estimates in highly IR populations such as adolescents with obesity are limited. A 6-h frequently sampled OGTT was performed in adolescent females with obesity. Two, 3-, and 4- hour implementations of OMM assuming an exponentially-decaying rate of glucose appearance beyond measured glucose concentrations were compared to the 6-h implementation. A 4- hour OMM implementation with truncated data (4h Tr) was also considered. Data from 68 participants were included (age 15.8 ± 1.2 years, BMI 35.4 ± 5.6 kg/m2). Although SI values were highly correlated for all implementations, they varied with protocol duration (2h: 2.86 ± 3.31, 3h: 2.55 ± 2.62, 4h: 2.81 ± 2.59, 4h tr: 3.13 ± 3.14, 6h: 3.06 ± 2.85 x 10-4 dl/kg/min per U/ml). SI estimates based on 2 or 3 h of data underestimated SI values, whereas 4-h SI estimates more closely approximated 6-h SI values. These results suggest that OGTT protocol duration should be considered when implementing OMM to estimate SI in adolescents with obesity and other IR populations.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations15
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMetabolism OpenSame topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsFrench-language works237,207