{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03377110694183865, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005628517823639775, 'mean_word_length': 5.433734939759036, '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}}
Long‐acting insulin analogues vs. NPH human insulin in type 1 diabetes. A meta‐analysis

Aim:  Basal insulin in type 1 diabetes can be provided using either NPH (Neutral Protamine Hagedorn) human insulin or long‐acting insulin analogues, which are supposed to warrant a better metabolic control with reduced hypoglycaemic risk. Aim of this meta‐analysis is the assessment of differences with respect to HbA1c (Glycated hemoglobin), incidence of hypoglycaemia, and weight gain, between NPH human insulin and each long‐acting analogue.