MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Nuevas Insulinas en el tratamiento de la Diabetes Tipo 1

2023· review· es· W4381163897 on OpenAlexaff
Hana Karime Rumié Carmi, Gonzalo Dominguez-Menéndez, Manuel Araya, Alejandro Martínez‐Aguayo

Bibliographic record

VenueAndes pediatrica · 2023
Typereview
Languagees
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInsulin glargineHypoglycemiaInsulinBiosimilarDiabetes mellitusInsulin degludecAction (physics)Onset of actionGrowth hormoneIntensive care medicinePharmacologyEndocrinologyInternal medicineHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Insulin therapy is complex in pediatric patients because they present greater variations in insulin requirements. Traditional insulins have limitations related to time of onset of action and duration of effect, which has led to the development of new insulins, seeking to reduce chronic complications, severe or nocturnal hypoglycemia, and to improve adherence to therapy. This review updates the information on new insulins, their mechanisms of action and the benefits they provide in the treatment of diabetes. Insulin analogues attempt to mimic the physiological secretion of the hormone, including time of action and duration of effect. The most used prandial analogs are the so-called rapid-acting insulins, including Faster Aspartic and the new basal insulins, glargine U300 and degludec, which have a prolonged action of more than 24 hours and therefore require a daily dose. New technologies under development include biosimilar insulins such as the glargine biosimilar, already available in the clinic. New formulations are being developed for the future, as well as novel ways of dispersing them, mimicking the action of pancreatic cells, which will allow a more physiological and personalized management of the disease.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAndes pediatricaSame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207