MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384663039 · doi:10.1186/s12902-023-01408-0

Prevalence of hyperuricemia among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2023· review· en· W4384663039 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Endocrine Disorders · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGout, Hyperuricemia, Uric Acid
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisPublication biasHyperuricemiaFunnel plotInternal medicineType 2 Diabetes MellitusDiabetes mellitusType 2 diabetesSystematic reviewDiabetic nephropathyDiabetic retinopathyMEDLINEUric acidEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Hyperuricemia increases morbidity and mortality in type 2 diabetic individuals. It is linked to the expansion of diabetes and cardiovascular diseases indicators, as well as being a significant predictor of coronary artery disease. It also leads to a poor prognosis and increment of diabetic complications including diabetic neuropathy, retinopathy, and nephropathy. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis was aimed to determine the pooled prevalence of hyperuricemia among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients in Africa. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. To identify relevant articles, we searched electronic databases such as PubMed, Google Scholar, African Journal Online, Science Direct, Embase, ResearchGate, Scopus, and Web of Sciences. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata 14.0 software. To evaluate heterogeneity, we utilized Cochran’s Q test and I 2 statistics. Publication bias was assessed through the examination of a funnel plot and Egger’s test. The pooled prevalence was estimated using a random effect model. Furthermore, sub-group and sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results The overall pooled prevalence of hyperuricemia among type 2 diabetic patients in Africa was 27.28% (95% CI: 23.07, 31.49). The prevalence was highest in Central Africa 33.72% (95% CI: 23.49, 43.95), and lowest in North Africa 24.72% (95% CI: 14.38, 35.07). Regarding sex, the pooled prevalence of hyperuricemia among female and male type 2 diabetic patients was 28.02% (95% CI: 22.92, 33.48) and 28.20% (95% CI: 22.92, 33.48), respectively. Conclusion This systematic review and meta-analysis showed a high prevalence of hyperuricemia among type 2 diabetic patients. So, regular screening and diagnosis of hyperuricemia required for preventing its pathological effects and contribution to chronic complications of diabetes. Systematic review registration : PROSPERO (2022: CRD42022331279).

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.259 · 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