MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282029860 · doi:10.1152/ajpheart.00058.2022

Guidelines on models of diabetic heart disease

2022· review· en· W4282029860 on OpenAlexafffund
Lisa C. Heather, Anne D. Hafstad, Ganesh V. Halade, Romain Harmancey, Kimberley M. Mellor, Paras K. Mishra, Erin E. Mulvihill, Miranda Nabben, Michinari Nakamura, Oliver J. Rider, Matthieu Ruiz, Adam R. Wende, John R. Ussher

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart InstituteUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNebraska Center for the Prevention of Obesity Diseases, College of Education and Human Sciences, University of Nebraska–LincolnNational Institute of General Medical SciencesMarsden FundHealth Research Council of New ZealandFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGovernment of CanadaNational Institutes of HealthBritish Heart FoundationNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsDiabetic cardiomyopathyDiabetes mellitusMedicineDiseaseHeart failureMyocardial infarctionIntensive care medicineType 2 diabetesHeart diseasePopulationCardiomyopathyCardiologyInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diabetes is a major risk factor for cardiovascular diseases, including diabetic cardiomyopathy, atherosclerosis, myocardial infarction, and heart failure. As cardiovascular disease represents the number one cause of death in people with diabetes, there has been a major emphasis on understanding the mechanisms by which diabetes promotes cardiovascular disease, and how antidiabetic therapies impact diabetic heart disease. With a wide array of models to study diabetes (both type 1 and type 2), the field has made major progress in answering these questions. However, each model has its own inherent limitations. Therefore, the purpose of this guidelines document is to provide the field with information on which aspects of cardiovascular disease in the human diabetic population are most accurately reproduced by the available models. This review aims to emphasize the advantages and disadvantages of each model, and to highlight the practical challenges and technical considerations involved. We will review the preclinical animal models of diabetes (based on their method of induction), appraise models of diabetes-related atherosclerosis and heart failure, and discuss in vitro models of diabetic heart disease. These guidelines will allow researchers to select the appropriate model of diabetic heart disease, depending on the specific research question being addressed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.268 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations78
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory PhysiologySame topicCardiovascular Function and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207