MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4283166637 · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-14215-9

Development and internal validation of a model to predict type 2 diabetic complications after gestational diabetes

2022· article· en· W4283166637 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ugochinyere Vivian Ukah, Robert W. Platt, Nathalie Auger, Kaberi Dasgupta, Natalie Dayan

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreUniversité de MontréalJewish General HospitalMcGill UniversityInstitut National de Santé Publique du Québec
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - Santé
KeywordsMedicineGestational diabetesDiabetes mellitusType 2 diabetesConfidence intervalPregnancyType 1 diabetesInternal medicineObstetricsGestationEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) increases the risk of early-onset type 2 diabetes, which further exacerbates the risk of developing diabetic complications such as kidney, circulatory, and neurological complications. Yet, existing models have solely focused on the prediction of type 2 diabetes, and not of its complications, which are arguably the most clinically relevant outcomes. Our aim was to develop a prediction model for type 2 diabetic complications in patients with GDM. Using provincial administrative data from Quebec, Canada, we developed a model to predict type 2 diabetic complications within 10 years among 90,143 women with GDM. The model was internally validated and assessed for discrimination, calibration, and risk stratification accuracy. The incidence of diabetic complications was 3.8 (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.4-4.3) per 10,000 person-years. The final prediction model included maternal age, socioeconomic deprivation, substance use disorder, gestational age at delivery, severe maternal morbidity, previous pregnancy complications, and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. The model had good discrimination [area under the curve (AUROC) 0.72 (95% CI 0.69-0.74)] and calibration (slope ≥ 0.9) to predict diabetic complications. In the highest category of the risk stratification table, the positive likelihood ratio was 8.68 (95% CI 4.14-18.23), thereby showing a moderate ability to identify women at highest risk of developing type 2 diabetic complications. Our model predicts the risk of type 2 diabetic complications with moderate accuracy and, once externally validated, may prove to be a useful tool in the management of women after GDM.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.292

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicGestational Diabetes Research and Management→French-language works237,207→