{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028070175438596492, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007017543859649123, 'mean_word_length': 5.511415525114155, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Misunderstanding in the classification of diabetes mellitus. What's in a name?

To assess whether physicians, residents, medical students, hospital diagnosis coders, and patients properly use the designations insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) and non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) that were established by criteria of the National Diabetes Data Group, we reviewed clinic and hospital records and administered questionnaires. Although essentially all cases of true IDDM were identified as such and most cases of NIDDM not requiring insulin therapy were correctly identified by all groups, patients with NIDDM on insulin therapy were misidentified as having IDDM by 38% of residents in internal medicine clinics and 68% of primary care and surgical subspecialty residents. On a survey, of 22 patients with NIDDM on insulin therapy, 17 (77%) considered themselves to have IDDM. Thus, patients who have NIDDM by the established criteria who are on insulin therapy are commonly mislabeled as having IDDM. We present an approach for dealing with this problem by adapting nomenclature focusing on insulin deficiency and resistance. It would probably also be helpful to separately identify the subset of patients with "insulin-deficient diabetes" who are ketosis-prone. It is important to use immunologic profiling (islet cell antibody testing) and insulin sensitivity or deficiency testing (C-peptide levels).