MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281614477 · doi:10.2337/db22-353-or

353-OR: Determining the Sequence of Microvascular Complications: Results of Multistate Markov Modelling in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT)

2022· article· en· W4281614477 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
LEIF ERIK LOVBLOM, Laurent Briollais, George Tomlinson, BRUCE A. PERKINS

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineComplicationDiabetes mellitusNephropathyRetinopathyPediatricsType 1 diabetesSurgeryEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Screening for neuropathy is complex and underperformed in practice. If neuropathy rarely occurs first, screening for it could be delayed until retinopathy or nephropathy are documented. To address this, we aimed to definitively determine the sequence of microvascular complications in the natural history of type 1 diabetes (T1D) . Using data available from the public NIDDK Repository (1983-2012) , independent of the DCCT/EDIC research group, we performed a multistate analysis using biostatistics techniques for complex trivariate processes of the 1441 participants with T1D. Retinopathy (‘Eye’, E) , nephropathy (‘Kidney’, K) , and neuropathy (‘Nerve’, N) were each screened repeatedly and defined by the early-stage phenotypes (Figure 1) . Our model accounted for intermittent ascertainment and differing screening schedules. At baseline, participants had mean age 27±7 years and duration 6±4 years. Markov model simulations started in the absence of complications (Ø) . Eye was the most common initial complication (49%) , followed by nerve (28%) , and kidney (22%) . Median time to first complication was 5.3 years. 4% had no complications through follow-up. While retinopathy is conclusively most common, the high frequency of other initial complications reinforces the current practice of unselected early screening for all three, including neuropathy. Disclosure L.Lovblom: None. L.Briollais: None. G.Tomlinson: None. B.A.Perkins: Advisory Panel; Abbott Diabetes, Insulet Corporation, Sanofi, Board Member; Novo Nordisk, Other Relationship; Abbott Diabetes, Insulet Corporation, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, Research Support; BMO Bank of Montreal, Novo Nordisk. Funding The Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the public NIDDK Central Repository.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetesSame topicRetinal Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207