Decreased Flow-Mediated Dilatation in Children With Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Type 1 diabetes (T1DM) is a strong risk factor for the development of cardiovascular disease. Flow-mediated dilatation (FMD) is an early noninvasive marker of endothelial function and it predicts future cardiovascular disease. However, the changes in FMD among T1DM children are still controversial. The present meta-analysis aimed to investigate whether FMD is impaired in children with T1DM. PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and Web of Science were searched for studies comparing FMD in children with T1DM and healthy controls. The Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for case–control studies was used to assess study quality. Data were pooled using a random effects models to obtain the weighted mean differences (WMD) in FMD and 95% CIs. Overall, 19 studies with 1245 patients and 872 healthy controls were included in this meta-analysis. Children with T1DM had significantly lower FMDs compared with healthy controls (WMD: −2.58; 95% CI: −3.36 to −1.81; P < .001). Meta-regression analysis revealed that low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels impacted the observed difference in FMD between T1DM and healthy children. This meta-analysis showed that T1DM children have impaired endothelial function, which indicates they are at higher risk of developing cardiovascular disease in later life.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.025 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".