558-P: Online Medical Education Advances Physicians’ Knowledge and Competence for the Use of Basal Insulin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and aims: Despite various alternative treatment options basal insulin continues to play an important role in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). The goal of this activity for primary care physicians (PCP) and diabetologists/endocrinologists (D/E) was to improve their understanding of the continued role of basal insulin in the management of T2D, address barriers to its initiation, and increase the awareness of novel once-weekly basal insulin formulations. Materials and methods: Two diabetes experts joined a 24-min online video discussion with synchronized slides. Educational effect was assessed using a repeated-pair design with pre-/post-assessment. 3 multiple choice questions assessed knowledge/competence, 1 question rated on a Likert-type scale assessed confidence. A paired samples t-test was conducted on overall average number of correct responses and for confidence rating, a McNemar’s test was conducted at the question level (5% significance level). Cohen’s d with correction for paired samples estimated the effect size of the education on number of correct responses. Data collection from 10/25/22 to 12/13/22. Results: • PCPs (n=73) improved their knowledge regarding basal insulin therapy in the management of T2D by 69% (p<.001) • D/E (n=126) improved their knowledge regarding the clinical profile of emerging once-weekly basal insulin formulations by 52% (p<.01) and their competence related to the identification of patients with T2D as suitable candidates for future treatment with once-weekly basal insulins by 192% (p<.001) • 40% of PCP (P<.001) and 31% of D/E (P<.001) increased their confidence in initiating basal insulin therapy in their patients with T2D Conclusion: Participation of D/E and PCP in an online video expert discussion improved their understanding of basal insulin therapy, the profile of emerging once-weekly formulations and the identification of appropriate patients with T2D significantly. Disclosure J.Trier: None. H.S.Bajaj: Research Support; Amgen Inc., AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Anji Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly and Company, Kowa Company, Ltd., Novo Nordisk, Pfizer Inc., Sanofi, Tricida, Inc. A.Philis-tsimikas: Advisory Panel; Dexcom, Inc., Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi, Other Relationship; Medtronic, Research Support; Novo Nordisk A/S, Lilly, Viking Therapeutics, NIH - National Institutes of Health.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.036 | 0.003 |
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".