Effects of delay in visiting a specialist doctor in type 2 diabetic patients on glycemic control: a retrospective cohort study with a 4-year follow-up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
F -Literature search, G -Funds CollectionBackground. diabetic patients' delay in visiting a specialist doctor can have significant effects on blood sugar factors.The present study aimed to determine the effects of delay in visiting a specialist doctor in type 2 diabetic patients on glycaemic factors.Material and methods.The patients' demographic and clinical information included in medical records of 209 type 2 diabetic patients referred to diabetes clinics in shiraz city, south of iran, were analysed using logistic mix-model regression.due to the occurrence of CoVid-19 during the follow-up period, data analyses were done separately before and after the pandemic.Results.The mean age of the patients was 63.47 ± 8.89 years, and 67.94% of the type 2 diabetic patients were female.after CoVid-19, haemoglobin a 1C (hBa 1C ) of the patients who had delays of < 3, 3-6 and > 6 months in referring to a specialist increased by 1.81 (or: 1.12-2.93),2.56 (or: 1.81-5.56)and 3.69 (or: 1.79-7.63),respectively, compared to the group without delays.in this period, 2-hour Postprandial Glucose (2-hpp) of the patients with delays of 3-6 and > 6 months and the Fasting blood sugar (Fbs) of the patients with delays of > 6 months had a significant increase of 1.92 (or: 1.01-3.65),2.14 (or: 1.09-4.21)and 2.36 (confidence interval of 95%: 1.27-4.39),respectively, compared to the patients without delays in visits.The above trends had a non-significant increase before CoVid-19, though.Conclusions.healthcare providers should ensure the continuity of providing services to diabetes patients, especially during health crises, by taking appropriate measures.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".