MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4237972113 · doi:10.14740/jem334w

Higher Prevalence of Diabetes Mellitus and Impaired Glucose Tolerance Among the Rural Population in Bulgaria

2016· article· en· W4237972113 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anna-Maria Borissovа, Alexander Shinkov, Jordan Vlahov, Lilia Dakovska, Тодор Тодоров

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Endocrinology and Metabolism · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersServierEli Lilly and CompanyAmgen
KeywordsMedicineDiabetes mellitusImpaired glucose toleranceRural populationInternal medicinePopulationEnvironmental healthEndocrinologyType 2 diabetes

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The socio-economic level is probably among the central risk factors for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) along with obesity, decreased physical activity and smoking. The International Diabetes Federation notes in particular that the main impact in the prevalence of diabetes is observed in low and middle-income countries, hence the disease might disproportionately affect lower socio-economic groups. The aim of the study was to determine the prevalence of diabetes and impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and assess its association with the type of place of residence in Bulgaria - cities, small towns and villages. Methods: We surveyed 2,032 subjects from five major geographic regions of the country, with age and gender proportions according to the latest population census - 27.5% rural population and 72.5% urban population. We included 1,076 women (53%) and 956 men (47%), with a mean age of 49.3 ± 14.8 years (20 - 80 years). Fasting blood glucose was measured in all participants and when indicated oral glucose tolerance test was performed. Diabetes was defined according to the WHO criteria (1999). Results: The prevalence of known T2DM, previously unknown T2DM and IGT was significantly higher among the rural population than in the city population - known T2DM: 8.6% (46/535) vs. 6% (62/1,031), P < 0.02; previously unknown T2DM: 3.55% (19/535) vs. 1.74% (18/1,031), P < 0.02; IGT: 2.4% (13/535) vs. 1.1% (12/1,031), P < 0.04. The combined prevalence of diabetes (known and unknown) and IGT (impaired fasting glucose (IFG) + IGT) was 16.44% (88/535) in the rural population, 14.13% (66/467) (NS) in small towns, and 11.16% in cities (115/1,030) (P < 0.01). Conclusions: National screening programs for diabetes should focus on the rural population due to the higher diabetes prevalence that might be explained by multiple adverse socio-economic factors. J Endocrinol Metab. 2016;6(2):52-58 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/jem334w

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Endocrinology and Metabolism→Same topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→