MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408685125 · doi:10.1210/jcemcr/luaf021

Euglycemic Ketoacidosis Postsleeve Gastrectomy in 2 People With Type 1 Diabetes Using Automated Insulin Delivery

2025· article· en· W4408685125 on OpenAlexaff
W. Aboznadah, Michael A. Tsoukas, Xiaowen Hu, Melissa‐Rosina Pasqua

Bibliographic record

VenueJCEM Case Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiabetic ketoacidosisKetoacidosisHypoglycemiaType 1 diabetesInsulinDiabetes mellitusType 2 diabetesPopulationIntensive care medicineSurgeryInsulin deliveryPediatricsInternal medicineEndocrinologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the prevalence of obesity rises in those with type 1 diabetes, there are more people with this condition undergoing bariatric surgery. Unfortunately, there is an increased risk of diabetic ketoacidosis, especially with euglycemia, in the postoperative period of bariatric surgery in this population. Automated insulin delivery is becoming increasingly popular as a form of intensive insulin therapy with major benefits such as reducing hypoglycemia, but the risk of ketoacidosis remains. We describe 2 cases of mild euglycemic ketoacidosis in the postoperative period after sleeve gastrectomy in adults with type 1 diabetes on commercial automated insulin delivery. Ketoacidosis postbariatric surgery is an ongoing risk, despite advancements in diabetes therapies; the information provided from technologies, however, can better inform and prevent this risk.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJCEM Case ReportsSame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207