7-LB: Gender Differences in Reported Consequences of Level 2 and Level 3 Hypoglycemia among Adults Living with Type 1 Diabetes—A BETTER Registry Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Hypoglycemia is a common side effect of type 1 diabetes (T1D) therapy with consequences ranging from physical and cognitive impairment to reduced quality of life. Studies evaluating consequences of level 2 (L2H, glucose level<3.0mmol/L without needing assistance from another person to recover) and level 3 (L3H, needing assistance from another person) hypoglycemia between the genders are sparse. Aim: To highlight the differences in reported consequences related to both L2H and L3H between genders. Methods: Self-reported data from an online Canadian registry of adults with T1D were analyzed using logistic regression models adjusted for age, diabetes technology use, hypoglycemia history in the past month, Hypoglycemia Fear Survey II (HFS II) , and Hypoglycemia Confidence Scale (HCS) scores. Results: Among 877 adults (65% women, mean age 43 ± 15 years, mean duration of T1D 25 ± 15 years, 34% reported a HbA1c ≤ 7.0%, 81% used continuous glucose monitoring, and 43% used an insulin pump) , 15% experienced L3H in the past year and 81% experienced L2H in the past month. Women reported more L2H (84% vs. 75%, p=0.004) and worse HFS-II and HCS scores than men (median 33 [IQR 23, 47] vs. 28 [18, 38], p=0.002 and 3.2 [2.9, 3.6] vs. 3.4 [3.0, 3.8], p<0.001, respectively) . The adjusted regression models showed that women were more likely than men to report experiencing persistent fatigue after L2H (OR 1.76, 95%CI [1.19, 2.61]) and increased anxiety, persistent fatigue, or an additional encounter with a healthcare professional after a L3H episode (1.71 [1.04, 2.82]; 1.75 [1.02, 3.00]; 2.59 [1.17, 5.74], respectively) . Conclusion: Women report significantly more L2H and L3H consequences compared to men, in addition to reporting higher fear and lower confidence. Social constructs on stress management may explain the observed gender differences, and suggest taking a gender-based differential approach when addressing hypoglycemia. Disclosure M. K. Talbo: None. M. Lebbar: None. V. Messier: None. Z. Wu: Other Relationship; Eli Lilly and Company. A. Brazeau: Research Support; Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi. 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 Canadian Institutes of Health Research (JT1-157204) and Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (4-SRA-2018-651-Q-R)
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".