762-P: Comparing Dual-Hormone and Single-Hormone Automated Insulin Delivery System on Nocturnal Glucose Management among Pediatric People Living with Type 1 Diabetes : A Pooled Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Only three studies have directly compared the efficacy of dual-hormone (DH) automated insulin delivery (AID) systems and single-hormone (SH) AID on overnight glucose management in pediatric people living with type 1 diabetes (PPWT1D) . Their conclusions differ. Pooling data could lead to stronger conclusions. Methods: Pooled data from 3 open-label, randomized, controlled, crossover studies on comparing DH-AID and SH-AID among PPWT1D (8-17 y/o) . The primary outcome was time in range% (TIR%) overnight (00:00-06:00) based on continuous glucose monitoring. Paired t-test was applied to compare the two groups. Results: Records from 50 PPWT1D [median (Q1-Q3) age: 14.0 years (11.8, 16.0) , mean ± SD HbA1c: 8.2 ± 0.8%] provided 246 nights of data (Table) . TIR% [ (median (IQR) ] for SH-AID and DH-AID was 91.3% (58.3, 100.0) and 94.4% (76.4, 100.0) , respectively (P=0.024) . DH-AID was superior to SH-AID in reducing time in hypo- (<3.9 mmol/L) and hyperglycemia (>13.9 mmol/L) but not glycemic variability. Conclusion: DH-AID has the potential to provide better overnight glucose management than SH-AID in PPWT1D. Disclosure Z.Wu: Other Relationship; Eli Lilly and Company. V.Messier: None. M.Lebbar: None. R.Rabasa-lhoret: Consultant; HLS Therapeutics Inc., Pfizer Inc., Other Relationship; Abbott Diabetes, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Dexcom, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Insulet Corporation, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Medtronic, Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk Canada Inc., Sanofi, Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated, Research Support; Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Cystic Fibrosis Canada, Diabetes Canada, Fondation Francophone pour la Recherche en Diabète (FFRD) , JDRF, National Institutes of Health, Société Francophone du Diabète (SFD) , Speaker's Bureau; Canadian Medical & Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group (CMS) , CPD Network, Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc. Funding Diabetes Canada grant (OG-2-12-3868-RR,OG-2-13-42P, OG-3-14-4500-RR) and Fondation JA De Sève
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 | 0.019 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.023 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".