Systematic review and meta‐analysis of post‐transplant diabetes mellitus in liver transplant recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Post-transplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM) compromises long-term survival in liver transplant (LT) recipients. The aim of this study was to determine incidence of PTDM after LT and risk factors associated with it. A literature search was conducted, and prospective studies that reported on the incidence of PTDM in LT adult patients on tacrolimus, sirolimus, or cyclosporine were included. We performed random effects meta-analyses for the incidence of PTDM stratified by immunosuppressant and time period. Of 9817 articles identified, 26 studies were included in the qualitative analysis and 21 studies were eligible for the quantitative analysis representing 79 559 LT recipients in 32 separate treatment arms. The proportion of patients who developed PTDM by two-three years was 0.15 (95% CI: 0.10-0.24) for cyclosporine, 0.23 (95% CI: 0.14-0.36) for tacrolimus, and 0.27 (95% CI: 0.23-0.30) for sirolimus. CONCLUSION: Our results showed that sirolimus-based immunosuppression was associated with a higher incidence of PTDM than tacrolimus or cyclosporine at two-three years. However, there were only two studies that compared all three drugs which is a limitation of the study and requires more studies with patients on sirolimus. Recipient factors increasing the risk of PTDM are older age, male sex, and high BMI.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".