Evaluating the Impact of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Prediabetes on Pulmonary Vascular Function and on the Development of Pulmonary Fibrosis: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Prediabetes, a metabolic state characterized by elevated blood glucose levels, has been associated with various systemic complications.However, its effects on pulmonary vascular function and pulmonary fibrosis remain poorly understood.This systematic review aims to summarize existing evidence on the impact of type 2 diabetes mellitus and prediabetes on these aspects.This protocol was prepared in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines for reporting protocols.Objective: To achieve our aim, we will examine published prospective observational studies, case-control studies, cohort studies, and cross-sectional studies involving non-diabetic, type 2 diabetic, and prediabetic reports. Methods:To achieve our aim, we will examine published prospective observational studies, case-control studies, cohort studies, and cross-sectional studies involving non-diabetic, type 2 diabetic, and prediabetic reports.Our database search will encompass Google Scholar, PubMed, Embase and Web of Science.The process of data extraction and quality assessment will be carried out independently by three reviewers, with a subsequent screening of results to ensure adherence to eligibility criteria.The STROBES checklist will be applied to evaluate the risk of bias.In the meta-analysis and sensitivity analysis, we will employ the Review Manager v5.4 Forrest plot.To gauge the quality of evidence, we will utilize the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.Results: This protocol provides guidance for systematically exploring articles investigating pulmonary vascular function and fibrosis within diabetic and pre-diabetic states.The outcomes derived from this protocol will not only steer the direction of future research but also inform the subsequent investigative endeavors. Conclusions:It is noteworthy that this systematic review will rely on publicly accessible data, which will be collected after the release of this protocol.This protocol serves as a compass for exploring articles that delve into studies about the prediabetic state, specifically in relation to assessments of pulmonary vascular function and pulmonary fibrosis.The outcomes generated from this protocol will offer valuable guidance for future research endeavors.Clinical Trial: The protocol has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with registration number "CRD42023478267", dated 14 November 2023.
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 | 0.082 | 0.167 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.024 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.076 | 0.011 |
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".