The relationship between rheumatoid arthritis and diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This systematic review/meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the relationship between rheumatoid arthritis and the incidence of diabetes mellitus. METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted up to 10 March 2020 in Medline (via Ovid), Embase (via Ovid) and Web of Science core collection to identify cohort studies comparing the risk of diabetes mellitus incidence in people with rheumatoid arthritis with the general population. The I2 statistic was used to test heterogeneity. Pooled relative risks were calculated using random-effects models. Publication bias was assessed using Egger's test and Begg's test. RESULTS: The initial search provided 3669 articles. Of those, five journal articles/two conference abstracts comprising 1 629 854 participants were included in this study. The funnel plot showed potential publication bias, proven by Egger's test (-3.15, P < 0.01), but not Begg's test (-0.05, P = 1.00). Heterogeneity was observed in I2 test (I2 = 96%, P < 0.01). We found that rheumatoid arthritis was associated with a higher risk of diabetes mellitus incidence (pooled relative risk, 1.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.40). Exploration of potential sources of heterogeneity found significant heterogeneity in different countries/regions (P = 0.002), but heterogeneity was NS in different study designs (P = 0.30). Sensitivity analyses confirmed that the association between rheumatoid arthritis and diabetes mellitus incidence was robust. CONCLUSION: Rheumatoid arthritis is associated with an increased risk of diabetes mellitus incidence. This finding supports the notion that inflammatory pathways are involved in the pathogenesis of diabetes. More intensive interventions targeting diabetes risk factors should be considered in people with rheumatoid arthritis.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.023 | 0.012 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".