MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3157398013 · doi:10.1063/5.0049209

Insulin delivery devices for diabetes mellitus from open-loop to closed-loop

2021· article· en· W3157398013 on OpenAlexaff
Dafei Lian

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsulinDiabetes mellitusClosed loopMedicineArtificial pancreasHypoglycemiaInsulin deliveryInsulin pumpComputer scienceBiomedical engineeringInternal medicineType 1 diabetesEndocrinologyEngineeringControl engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Insulin therapy is one of the most widely used methods for antidiabetic treatment. In contrast with manually controlled open-loop insulin delivery devices, closed-loop devices are continuously and automatically operated to mimic the natural insulin production process of the pancreas. Insulin pen and pumps are conventional open-loop devices that deliver insulin via subcutaneous injections. Insulin inhaler and tablets are novel devices that enable non-invasive insulin administration. The discomfort and risk of hypoglycemia associated with open-loop administrations facilitated the investigation of glucose-responsive closed-loop devices. Smart insulin pumps with a continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is able to sense the real-time glucose levels and pause insulin infusion when necessary. Nonelectronic nanotechnology-enabled devices, such as microneedle array patches and hydrogel-containing catheters, demonstrate great value in the future of potential diabetes treatment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP conference proceedingsSame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207