Bibliographic record
Abstract
As Chair of the Association of British Clinical Diabetologists (ABCD), I am pleased to share a summary of our activities over the past six months -a period marked by both visible impact and significant behind-the-scenes transformation.Externally, ABCD has continued to deliver high-value resources, events and guidance for our members and the wider diabetes community.The Diabetes Update programme for trainees in diabetes and endocrinology, held earlier this year, showcased expertled workshops and presentations on topics ranging from hybrid closed-loop technology to diabetes in pregnancy, eating disorders and perioperative management.These sessions advance clinical knowledge and also foster collaboration across disciplines of diabetes and endocrinology.Because of the high demand for places, the next update will be in Telford at the end of January 2026 and will be open to residents and consultants alike.Look out for the emails that will be sent out regularly between now and then.We have published several new position papers and consensus guidelines, including joint statements with partner organisations on the discontinuation of Levemir (insulin detemir) and the use of finerenone in diabetic kidney disease.These documents reflect our commitment to evidence-based practice and timely clinical guidance.Beyond the public-facing work, a substantial amount of unseen effort has gone into strengthening the internal foundations of the ABCD.Over the past Davoodian N, Lotfaliany M, Huxley RR, et al.Regression from prediabetes to normoglycaemia and the role of cardiometabolic risk factors on the subsequent risk of developing type 2 diabetes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.493 | 0.418 |
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".