MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404144841 · doi:10.1080/03007995.2024.2418993

Dapagliflozin or saxagliptin in pediatric type 2 diabetes: a plain language summary

2024· article· en· W4404144841 on OpenAlexaff
Naim Shehadeh

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Medical Research and Opinion · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsBarrie Urology Group
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDapagliflozinSaxagliptinType 2 diabetesDiabetes mellitusInternal medicinePediatricsEndocrinologySitagliptin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plain Language SummaryWhat is this plain language summary about?The T2NOW study was a clinical trial which tested the use of two different blood sugar-reducing drugs (dapagliflozin or saxagliptin) in young people aged between 10 and 17 years with type 2 diabetes. Each drug was compared with a placebo to see to what extent the treatment can control blood sugar levels, and to observe any side effects.Type 2 diabetes is a chronic condition affecting how the body processes sugar, resulting in high levels of sugar in the blood. Over time, high blood sugar levels can cause damage to certain parts of the body such as the cardiovascular system, the kidneys, nerves, and eyes, often resulting in serious health problems. Once considered a disease of middle-age or older-age, it is becoming more common in younger people, in part because of an increase in childhood obesity. This is concerning, as when diabetes starts at a young age it can progress quickly and lead to these serious health problems earlier in life. Improvements in diet and exercise are important elements for everyone with type 2 diabetes. However, there are currently very few other treatments available for children and adolescents.What are the key takeaways?When compared to a group of participants receiving placebo in the study, participants receiving dapagliflozin had significantly improved blood sugar control but participants receiving saxagliptin did not. Both the dapagliflozin and saxagliptin treatments were generally well tolerated by participants, with similar proportions in each group experiencing side effects. Only one participant in each group stopped treatment because of side effects. Similar proportions of participants in all groups–including the placebo group–had hypoglycemia, suggesting that neither dapagliflozin nor saxagliptin affected the likelihood of experiencing this important side effect.What are the main conclusions reported by the researchers?The T2NOW study showed that dapagliflozin could be an addition to treatment options for young people with type 2 diabetes as it helped to control blood sugar levels and did not raise any safety concerns. In contrast, although there were no safety concerns related to use of saxagliptin, it did not significantly help to control blood sugar levels in this study.This is an abstract of the Plain Language Summary of Publication article.View the full Plain Language Summary PDF of this article to read the full-textLink to original article here

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.008

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Medical Research and OpinionSame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207