Diabetes Risk Factors and Bone Microarchitecture as Assessed by High-Resolution Peripheral Quantitative Computed Tomography in Adults With Long-standing Type 1 Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether type 1 diabetes and its complications are associated with bone geometry and microarchitecture. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study was embedded in a long-term observational study. High-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT) scans of the distal radius and distal and diaphyseal tibia were performed in a subset of 183 participants with type 1 diabetes from the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) study and 94 control participants without diabetes. HbA1c, skin advanced glycation end products (AGEs), and diabetes-related complications were assessed in EDIC participants with >30 years of follow-up. RESULTS: Compared with control participants (aged 60 ± 8 years, 65% female), EDIC participants (aged 60 ± 7 years, diabetes duration 38 ± 5 years, 51% female) had lower total bone mineral density (BMD) at the distal radius (-7.9% [95% CI -15.2%, -0.6%]; P = 0.030) and distal tibia (-11.3% [95% CI -18.5%, -4.2%]; P = 0.001); larger total area at all sites (distal radius 4.7% [95% CI 0.5%, 8.8%; P = 0.030]; distal tibia 5.9% [95% CI 2.1%, 9.8%; P = 0.003]; diaphyseal tibia 3.4% [95% CI 0.8%, 6.1%; P = 0.011]); and poorer radius trabecular and cortical microarchitecture. Estimated failure load was similar between the two groups. Among EDIC participants, higher HbA1c, AGE levels, and macroalbuminuria were associated with lower total BMD. Macroalbuminuria was associated with larger total area and lower cortical thickness at the distal radius. Higher HbA1c and AGE levels and lower glomerular filtration rate, peripheral neuropathy, and retinopathy were associated with deficits in trabecular microarchitecture. CONCLUSIONS: Type 1 diabetes is associated with lower BMD, larger bone area, and poorer trabecular microarchitecture. Among participants with type 1 diabetes, suboptimal glycemic control, AGE accumulation, and microvascular complications are associated with deficits in bone microarchitecture and lower BMD.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".