MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381377576 · doi:10.2337/db23-282-or

282-OR: Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery Postpartum in Type 1 Diabetes

2023· article· en· W4381377576 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
LOIS E. DONOVAN, DENICE FEIG, Patricia Lemieux, HELEN R. MURPHY, Ronald J. Sigal, JOSEPHINE HO, Jennifer M. Yamamoto

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomizationBreastfeedingRandomized controlled trialPregnancyPostpartum periodInsulinType 2 diabetesType 1 diabetesInsulin pumpDiabetes mellitusInternal medicineEndocrinologyPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Postpartum demands of caring for a newborn, breastfeeding, and sleep deprivation result in little time for self care of type 1 diabetes (T1D). Data are limited on the efficacy, safety and feasibility of closed loop insulin delivery postpartum. Methods: We performed an open label, controlled pilot trial randomizing women to hybrid closed loop insulin delivery Medtronic MiniMed™ 670G/770G in auto mode or sensor augmented insulin pump (SAP) therapy in the first 12 twelve postpartum weeks. The primary outcome was the percent time in target glucose range of 70-180 mg/dL (3.9-10.0 mmol/L). Mixed models analysis assessed between group differences in glucose measures from median start time of closed loop (8 days) to 12wks postpartum. Results: Twenty women were recruited. Two withdrew prior to randomization. The remaining 18 women completed 12 weeks of postpartum follow up in their assigned randomization group. Overall baseline mean age, duration of T1D and first pregnancy A1c was 32 years, 22 years and 6.9% respectively. Analyses adjusted for first pregnancy A1c and was intention to treat. Time in range did not differ between groups (79 ± 8.0% versus 80 ± 6.4% p =.079). Time below 70mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L) and 54mg/dL (3.0 mmol/L) was less for women randomized to closed loop versus SAP (1.6 ± .72 % vs 5.3 ± 3.3 % p <0.001 and .23 ± .16 % vs .95 ± .82 % p = 0.002 respectively). Time above 180 mg/dL (10 mmol/L) was not different between groups 19.5 ±8.7% vs 15.9 ±7.8% p = .823. Mean glucose was 146 ± 13 and 133 ± 14 mg/dL p <.001 for closed loop and SAP groups respectively. No episodes of diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia occurred in either group. Conclusions: Closed loop insulin delivery postpartum was associated with less hypoglycemia than SAP and slightly higher mean glucose. There were no safety concerns. Time in target glucose range was high, minimizing the potential for further improvement with closed loop. These findings are reassuring for the use of closed loop insulin delivery postpartum because of its’ potential to reduce hypoglycemia. Disclosure L.E.Donovan: Research Support; Dexcom, Inc., Medtronic, Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc., Inner Analytics. D.Feig: Advisory Panel; Novo Nordisk Canada Inc., Speaker's Bureau; Sanofi, Novo Nordisk Canada Inc. P.Lemieux: Other Relationship; Dexcom, Inc. H.R.Murphy: Advisory Panel; Medtronic, Research Support; Dexcom, Inc. R.C.Bell: None. R.J.Sigal: Research Support; Novo Nordisk. J.Ho: None. J.M.Yamamoto: None. Funding Calgary Health Trust

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.297
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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetesSame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207