EFFECT OF LOW-DENSITY LIPOPROTEIN (LDL) CHOLESTEROL VALUE ON NON-PROLIFERATIVE DIABETIC RETINOPATHY (NPDR) IN PATIENTS WITH TYPE II DIABETES MELLITUS (T2DM): A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction & Objectives : Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) is a metabolic disease in which the body is unable to control blood sugar levels and is characterized by hyperglycemia caused by lack of insulin action. One of the most common microvascular complications of DM that can cause blindness to sufferers is Diabetic Retinopathy (DR). One of the risk factors that can exacerbate the progression of T2DM is the level of Low-Density Lipoprotein (LDL). However, there are still differences of opinion in several studies if LDL has a significant role in the occurrence of DR. This study aimed to determine whether there is a relationship between the value of LDL cholesterol and the occurrence of Non-Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy.
 Methods : Systematic review utilizing MeSH terminology and PICO methods were done for information extraction of online database, including PubMed, and Google Scholar by utilizing the following keyword “Low-Density Lipoprotein”, “Non-Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy”, “Diabetes Melitus”. The extracted studies were then analyzed using the New-Castle Ottawa Scale (NOS).
 Results : In total, 2 eligible studies (103 subjects) were found. Dornan et al., stated that total cholesterol levels were higher in NPDR Patients (5.1 +/- 0.7 mmol/l, p ? 0,02) and Mursi et al., shows that in patients with uncontrolled LDL cholesterol, NPDR was found (53,7%, p < 0,015). NOS was used to evaluate the quality of the studies and all studies showed to be in good quality.
 Conclusion : According to the results of this systematic review, there is a significant correlation between the degree of diabetic retinopathy and LDL cholesterol.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".