Does COVID-19 Infection Increase the Risk of Diabetes? Current Evidence.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Multiple studies report an increased incidence of diabetes following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Given the potential increased global burden of diabetes, understanding the effect of SARS-CoV-2 in the epidemiology of diabetes is important. Our aim was to review the evidence pertaining to the risk of incident diabetes after COVID-19 infection. RECENT FINDINGS: Incident diabetes risk increased by approximately 60% compared to patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection. Risk also increased compared to non-COVID-19 respiratory infections, suggesting SARS-CoV-2-mediated mechanisms rather than general morbidity after respiratory illness. Evidence is mixed regarding the association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and T1D. SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with an elevated risk of T2D, but it is unclear whether the incident diabetes is persistent over time or differs in severity over time. SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with an increased risk of incident diabetes. Future studies should evaluate vaccination, viral variant, and patient- and treatment-related factors that influence risk.

Are fewer cases of diabetes mellitus diagnosed in the months after SARS-CoV-2 infection? A population-level view in the EHR-based RECOVER program.

Long-term sequelae of severe acute respiratory coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection may include increased incidence of diabetes. Here we describe the temporal relationship between new type 2 diabetes and SARS-CoV-2 infection in a nationwide database. We found that while the proportion of newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes increased during the acute period of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the mean proportion of new diabetes cases in the 6 months post-infection was about 83% lower than the 6 months preinfection. These results underscore the need for further investigation to understand the timing of new diabetes after COVID-19, etiology, screening, and treatment strategies.

Effect of SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Infection Severity on Longer-Term Glycemic Control and Weight in People With Type 2 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and severity of infection with longer-term glycemic control and weight in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in the U.S. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using longitudinal electronic health record data of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C). Patients were ≥18 years old with an ICD-10 diagnosis of T2D and at least one HbA1c and weight measurement prior to and after an index date of their first coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnosis or negative SARS-CoV-2 test. We used propensity scores to identify a matched cohort balanced on demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and medications used to treat diabetes. The primary outcome was the postindex average HbA1c and postindex average weight over a 1 year time period beginning 90 days after the index date among patients who did and did not have SARS-CoV-2 infection. Secondary outcomes were postindex average HbA1c and weight in patients who required hospitalization or mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the postindex average HbA1c or weight in patients who had SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with control subjects. Mechanical ventilation was associated with a decrease in average HbA1c after COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: In a multicenter cohort of patients in the U.S. with preexisting T2D, there was no significant change in longer-term average HbA1c or weight among patients who had COVID-19. Mechanical ventilation was associated with a decrease in HbA1c after COVID-19.

Peer mentoring for professional and personal growth in academic medicine.

Mentorship is a critical component of career development, particularly in academic medicine. Peer mentorship, which does not adhere to traditional hierarchies, is perhaps more accessible for underrepresented groups, including women and minorities. In this article, we review various models of peer mentorship, highlighting their respective advantages and disadvantages. Structured peer mentorship groups exist in different settings, such as those created under the auspices of formal career development programs, part of training grant programs, or through professional societies. Social media has further enabled the establishment of informal peer mentorship through participatory online groups, blogs, and forums that provide platforms for peer-to-peer advice and support. Such groups can evolve rapidly to address changing conditions, as demonstrated by physician listserv and Facebook groups related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Peer mentorship can also be found among colleagues brought together through a common location, interest, or goal, and typically these relationships are informal and fluid. Finally, we highlight here our experience with intentional formation of a small peer mentoring group that provides structure and a safe space for professional and social-emotional growth and support. In order to maximize impact and functionality, this model of peer mentorship requires commitment among peers and a more formalized process than many other peer mentoring models, accounting for group dynamics and the unique needs of members. When done successfully, the depth of these mentoring relationships can produce myriad benefits for individuals with careers in academic medicine including, but not limited to, those from underrepresented backgrounds.