MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412176331 · doi:10.1007/s12471-025-01967-y

2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes

2025· review· en· W4412176331 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fabrice M A C Martens, Frank L.J. Visseren, Jan Westerink, Ruud F. Spee, El Messaoudi Saloua, Arend Mosterd, Louis Handoko, Maarten J.G. Leening, Tjeerd J. Römer, Andries Slootweg, Arianne C. van Bon, Martin E W Hemels

Bibliographic record

VenueNetherlands Heart Journal · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedisch Spectrum Twente
KeywordsMedicineDiabetes mellitusDiseaseCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyIntensive care medicineInternal medicineCardiologyMyocardial infarctionEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 2023 update of the European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in patients with diabetes are designed to guide prevention, early diagnosis, and management of CVD in patients with diabetes and provide recommendations on CVD risk stratification, as well as on screening. This article provides a summary of the key recommendations and a practical approach for cardiologists in the Netherlands to implement these guidelines in daily clinical practice by focusing on recommendations related to type 2 diabetes, including a step-by-step scheme for prescription of Sodium-Glucose Transport Protein 2 Inhibitors (SGLT2) inhibitors and Glucagon-like peptide‑1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists. These agents can be prescribed in addition to standard care, and independent of glucose control, target HbA1c, or obesity.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.010

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.272 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNetherlands Heart JournalSame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207