Le rôle des virus de la famille herpes viridae dans le développement du diabète de type 2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Type 2 diabetes is a major public health problem, with an increasing incidence worldwide. Several studies suggest that human herpes viruses play a role in the development of type 2 diabetes. Thus, we conducted a systematic review of the literature to assess existing data on the link between human herpes viruses and the development of type 2 diabetes. Methods: First, we selected from several databases studies evaluating the link between human herpes virus and the development of type 2 diabetes. Then, the studies were collected and included, from the RAYYAN software, double blind, as well as manual data extraction. Finally, the descriptive analysis and the quality analysis of the studies from the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were carried out. Results: Twenty-one studies were included, including six cross-sectional studies, twelve case control studies and three cohort studies. The results of these studies are mixed. Although these relationships are not consistently found in the studies, there seems to be a significant association between type 2 diabetes, Epstein Barr virus, rosaceoloviruses and herpes virus 8. However, there is no link, is not found with the varicella zoster virus. For cytomegalovirus and herpes simplex virus, the results are mixed but the only cohort study finds a significant link. Conclusion: Based on current literature data, despite several encouraging results, Herpes virus infection cannot be considered a risk factor for type 2 diabetes. Further large-scale prospective studies are needed to establish a causal link.
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 | 0.007 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".