MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158925263 · doi:10.1210/jendso/bvab048.559

Factors Associated With Low Bone Mineral Density in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: A Cross-Sectional Study

2021· article· en· W3158925263 on OpenAlexaff
Julie-Catherine Coll, Élodie Garceau, Laëtitia Michou, S. John Weisnagel, Fabrice Mac‐Way, Suzanne N. Morin, Rémi Rabasa‐Lhoret, Claudia Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Endocrine Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsMontreal Clinical Research InstituteMcGill University Health CentreUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBone mineralType 1 diabetesCross-sectional studyContext (archaeology)Femoral neckOsteoporosisDiabetes mellitusLogistic regressionUnivariate analysisInternal medicineType 2 diabetesMultivariate analysisEndocrinologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Context: Individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) have a two- to threefold increase in fracture risk at any site, and up to a sevenfold increase in hip fracture risk compared to those without diabetes. The mechanisms accounting for this bone fragility are not yet fully understood. Objectives: 1) To determine factors associated with low bone mineral density (BMD) in patients with T1D; 2) To assess the association between skin advanced glycation end products (AGEs) and low BMD in patients with T1D. Methods: These are preliminary data from patients with T1D included in a cross-sectional study aiming at comparing the prevalence of vertebral fractures between adult patients with T1D from two tertiary care centers and age- and sex-matched controls without diabetes. Patients were eligible if they were aged ≥20 years and had a diagnosis of T1D for at least 5 years. Patients were classified as having a low BMD if Z-score was ≤-2.0 at any site (lumbar spine, femoral neck, total hip, radius) in patients aged <50 years or if T-score was ≤-1.0 at any site in patients aged ≥50 years or in postmenopausal women. Skin AGEs (surrogate marker of overall including bone AGEs) were measured by skin autofluorescence (AGE Reader ®). Unpaired t-tests or Chi-squared tests were used to compare characteristics between patients with or without a low BMD. Variables associated with a low BMD were determined by univariate analysis and were subsequently included in a multivariate logistic regression analysis if p<0.1 in the univariate analysis. All variables were tested for multicollinearity. Results: 106 patients with T1D were included (mean age 45.2±15.0 years; mean BMI 26.3±5.1 kg/m2; 54.7% women; mean duration of diabetes 28.2±13.6 years; 44.3% with a microvascular complication). Mean HbA1C over the past 3 years was 7.5±0.8%. A third of the patients (31.1%) had a low BMD (3 patients using Z-score; 30 patients using T-score). Patients with a low BMD were older (58.3 vs 39.3 years, p<0.001), had a lower mean HbA1C over the past 3 years (7.3% vs 7.6%, p=0.047), a longer diabetes duration (36.1 vs 24.6 years, p<0.001), higher skin AGEs (2.50 vs 2.03, p<0.001), a higher prevalence of microvascular complications (63.6% vs 37.7%, p=0.02) and a higher prevalence of abnormal albumin to creatinine ratio (ACR ≥2.0) on the day of assessment (38.7% vs 11.8%, p=0.003). In multivariate regression analysis, age (p<0.001), abnormal ACR (p=0.003) and lower mean HbA1C over the past 3 years (p=0.02) remained significantly associated with a low BMD. Skin AGEs were correlated with age (r=0.56) and diabetes duration (r=0.47). Conclusion: In this population with T1D, a low BMD was independently associated with older age, abnormal ACR and, unexpectedly, with a lower mean HbA1C over the past 3 years, but not with skin AGEs.

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)0.000
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.241 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Endocrine SocietySame topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsFrench-language works237,207