Respiratory function in uncomplicated type 1 diabetes: Blunted during exercise even though normal at rest!
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aims Type 1 diabetes is associated with a substantially increased risk of impaired lung function, which may impair aerobic fitness. We therefore aimed to examine the ventilatory response during maximal exercise and the pulmonary diffusion capacity function at rest in individuals with uncomplicated type 1 diabetes. Methods In all, 17 adults with type 1 diabetes free from micro–macrovascular complications (glycated haemoglobin: 8.0 ± 1.3%), and 17 non‐diabetic adults, carefully matched to the type 1 diabetes group according to gender, age, level of physical activity and body composition, participated in our study. Lung function was assessed by spirometry and measurements of the combined diffusing capacity for nitric oxide (DLNO) and carbon monoxide (DLCO) at rest. Subjects performed a maximal exercise test during which the respiratory parameters were measured. Results At rest, DLCO (30.4 ± 6.1 ml min−1 mmHg−1 vs. 31.4 ± 5.7 ml min−1 mmHg−1, respectively, p = 0.2), its determinants Dm (membrane diffusion capacity) and Vc (pulmonary capillary volume) were comparable among type 1 diabetes and control groups, respectively. Nevertheless, spirometry parameters (forced vital capacity = 4.9 ± 1.0 L vs. 5.5 ± 1.0 L, p < 0.05; forced expiratory volume 1 = 4.0 ± 0.7 L vs. 4.3 ± 0.7 L, p < 0.05) were lower in individuals with type 1 diabetes, although in the predicted normal range. During exercise, ventilatory response to exercise was different between the two groups: tidal volume was lower in type 1 diabetes vs. individuals without diabetes (p < 0.05). Type 1 diabetes showed a reduced VO2max (34.7 ± 6.8 vs. 37.9 ± 6.3, respectively, p = 0.04) in comparison to healthy subjects. Conclusions Individuals with uncomplicated type 1 diabetes display normal alveolar‐capillary diffusion capacity and at rest, while their forced vital capacity, tidal volumes and VO2 are reduced during maximal exercise.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".