MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391848491 · doi:10.1016/j.lanepe.2024.100852

Non-coronary arterial outcomes in people with type 1 diabetes mellitus: a Swedish retrospective cohort study

2024· article· en· W4391848491 on OpenAlexaff
Tarik Avdic, Björn Eliasson, Araz Rawshani, Jan Borén, Hertzel C. Gerstein, Joakim Nordanstig, Mohamad Rihawi, Joshua A. Beckman, Darren K. McGuire, Elmir Ömerovic, Naveed Sattar, Deepak L. Bhatt

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Regional Health - Europe · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeripheral Artery Disease Management
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
FundersDaiichi Sankyo EuropeSt. Jude MedicalNational Institutes of HealthEsperion TherapeuticsDuke Clinical Research InstituteNovo NordiskEisaiBelvoir Media GroupAmarin CorporationBoston Scientific CorporationEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbAstraZenecaCSL BehringCleveland ClinicAlnylam PharmaceuticalsAmgenPfizerAmerican Heart Association
KeywordsMedicineDiabetes mellitusInternal medicineCoronary artery diseaseRisk factorType 2 Diabetes MellitusCardiologyType 2 diabetesIncidence (geometry)CohortSurgeryEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Observational studies on long-term trends, risk factor association and importance are scarce for type 1 diabetes mellitus and peripheral arterial outcomes. We set out to investigate trends in non-coronary complications and their relationships with cardiovascular risk factors in persons with type 1 diabetes mellitus compared to matched controls. Methods: 34,263 persons with type 1 diabetes mellitus from the Swedish National Diabetes Register and 164,063 matched controls were included. Incidence rates of extracranial large artery disease, aortic aneurysm, aortic dissection, lower extremity artery disease, and diabetic foot syndrome were analyzed using standardized incidence rates and Cox regression. Findings: Between 2001 and 2019, type 1 diabetes mellitus incidence rates per 100,000 person-years were as follows: extracranial large artery disease 296.5-84.3, aortic aneurysm 0-9.2, aortic dissection remained at 0, lower extremity artery disease 456.6-311.1, and diabetic foot disease 814.7-77.6. Persons with type 1 diabetes mellitus with cardiometabolic risk factors at target range did not exhibit excess risk of extracranial large artery disease [HR 0.83 (95% CI, 0.20-3.36)] or lower extremity artery disease [HR 0.94 (95% CI, 0.30-2.93)], compared to controls. Persons with type 1 diabetes with all risk factors at baseline, had substantially elevated risk for diabetic foot disease [HR 29.44 (95% CI, 3.83-226.04)], compared to persons with type 1 diabetes with no risk factors. Persons with type 1 diabetes mellitus continued to display a lower risk for aortic aneurysm, even with three cardiovascular risk factors at baseline [HR 0.31 (95% CI, 0.15-0.67)]. Relative importance analyses demonstrated that education, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), duration of diabetes and lipids explained 54% of extracranial large artery disease, while HbA1c, smoking and systolic blood pressure explained 50% of lower extremity artery disease and HbA1c alone contributed to 41% of diabetic foot disease. Income, duration of diabetes and body mass index explained 66% of the contribution to aortic aneurysm. Interpretation: Peripheral arterial complications decreased in persons with type 1 diabetes mellitus, except for aortic aneurysm which remained low. Besides glycemic control, traditional cardiovascular risk factors were associated with incident outcomes. Risk of these outcomes increased with additional risk factors present. Persons with type 1 diabetes mellitus exhibited a lower risk of aortic aneurysm compared to controls, despite presence of cardiovascular risk factors. Funding: Swedish Governmental and the county support of research and education of doctors, the Swedish Heart and Lung Foundation, Sweden and Åke-Wibergs grant.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Regional Health - EuropeSame topicPeripheral Artery Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207