MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3198301238 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049782

COVID-19 hinterland: surveilling the self-reported impacts of the pandemic on diabetes management in the USA (cross-sectional results of the iNPHORM study)

2021· article· en· W3198301238 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandria Ratzki‐Leewing, Bridget Ryan, J.D. Buchenberger, Joseph W Dickens, Jason Black, Stewart B. Harris

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersSanofi
KeywordsMedicinePandemicCross-sectional studyPsychosocialSocioeconomic statusType 2 diabetesPharmacyDiabetes mellitusType 1 diabetesDiabetes managementHypoglycemiaFamily medicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)GerontologyEnvironmental healthDiseaseInternal medicinePopulationPsychiatryPathologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MAIN OBJECTIVE: To determine how and to what extent COVID-19 has affected real-world, self-reported glycaemic management in Americans with type 1 or type 2 diabetes taking insulin and/or secretagogues, with or without infection. DESIGN: A cross-sectional substudy using data from the Investigating Novel Predictions of Hypoglycemia Occurrence using Real-world Models panel survey. SETTING: USA. PARTICIPANTS: Americans 18-90 years old with type 1 or 2 diabetes taking insulin and/or secretagogues were conveniently sampled from a probability-based internet panel. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: A structured, COVID-19-specific questionnaire was administered to assess the impact of the pandemic (irrespective of infection) on socioeconomic, behavioural/clinical and psychosocial aspects of glycaemic management. RESULTS: Data from 667 respondents (type 1 diabetes: 18%; type 2 diabetes: 82%) were analysed. Almost 25% reported A1c values ≥8.1%. Rates of severe and non-severe hypoglycaemia were 0.68 (95% CI 0.5 to 0.96) and 2.75 (95% CI 2.4 to 3.1) events per person-month, respectively. Ten respondents reported a confirmed or probable COVID-19 diagnosis. Because of the pandemic, 24% of respondents experienced difficulties affording housing; 28% struggled to maintain sufficient food to avoid hypoglycaemia; and 19% and 17% reported challenges accessing diabetes therapies and testing strips, respectively. Over one-quarter reported issues retrieving antihyperglycaemics from the pharmacy and over one-third reported challenges consulting with diabetes providers. The pandemic contributed to therapeutic non-adherence (14%), drug rationing (17%) and reduced monitoring (16%). Many struggled to keep track, and in control, of hypoglycaemia (12%-15%) and lacked social support to help manage their risk (19%). Nearly half reported decreased physical activity. Few statistically significant differences were observed by diabetes type. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 was found to cause substantial self-reported deficiencies in glycaemic management. Study results signal the need for decisive action to restabilise routine diabetes care in the USA. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04219514.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations21
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207