Defining and phenotyping gastric abnormalities in long-term type 1 diabetes using body surface gastric mapping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective To define phenotypes of gastric myoelectrical abnormalities and relation to symptoms in people with longstanding T1D, compared to matched healthy controls, using a novel non-invasive body surface gastric mapping (BSGM) device. Research design and methods BSGM was performed on people with T1D of >10 years duration and matched controls, employing Gastric Alimetry (Alimetry, New Zealand), comprising a high-resolution 64-channel array, validated symptom logging App, and wearable reader. Results 32 people with T1D were recruited (15 with a high symptom burden), and 32 controls. Those with symptoms showed more unstable gastric myoelectrical activity, (Gastric Alimetry Rhythm Index 0.39 vs 0.51, p=0.017; and lower average spatial covariance 0.48 vs 0.51, p=0.009) compared with controls. Those with T1D and symptoms also had higher prevalence of peripheral neuropathy (67% vs 6%, p=0.001), anxiety/depression diagnoses (27% vs 0%, p=0.001), and mean HbA1c levels (76 vs 56 mmol/mol, p<0.001). BSGM defined distinct phenotypes in participants including those with markedly unstable gastric rhythms (4/32, 12.5%), and abnormally high gastric frequencies (10/32, 31%). Deviation in gastric frequency was positively correlated with symptoms of bloating, upper gut pain, nausea and vomiting, and fullness and early satiation (r>0.35, p<0.05) Conclusion Gastroduodenal symptoms in people with longstanding T1D correlate with gastric myoelectrical abnormalities on BSGM evaluation, in addition to glycemic control, psychological comorbidities, and peripheral neuropathy. BSGM using the Gastric Alimetry device identified a range of myoelectrical phenotypes, representing both myogenic and neurogenic mechanisms, which represent targets for diagnosis, monitoring and therapy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".