Effect of Hypoglycemia on Brain Structure in People With Type 2 Diabetes: Epidemiological Analysis of the ACCORD-MIND MRI Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The effect of hypoglycemia related to treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on brain structure remains unclear. We aimed to assess whether symptomatic severe hypoglycemia is associated with brain atrophy and/or white matter abnormalities. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We included T2DM participants with brain MRI from the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes-Memory in Diabetes (ACCORD-MIND) trial. Symptomatic severe hypoglycemia was defined as blood glucose <2.8 mmol/L or symptoms resolved with treatments that required the assistance of another person or medical assistance (hypoglycemia requiring assistance [HA]). Standardized brain MRI was performed at baseline and at 40 months. Total brain volume (TBV) and abnormal white matter (AWM) volume were calculated using an automated computer algorithm. Brain MRI scans of hypoglycemic participants were also reviewed for local disease. RESULTS: Of the 503 T2DM participants (mean age, 62 years) with successful baseline and 40-month brain MRI, 28 had at least one HA episode during the 40-month follow-up. Compared with participants without HA, those with HA had marginally significant less atrophy (less decrease in TBV) from baseline to 40 months (-9.55 [95% CI -15.21, -3.90] vs. -15.38 [95% CI -16.64, -14.12], P = 0.051), and no significant increase of AWM volume (2.06 [95% CI 1.71, 2.49] vs. 1.84 [95% CI 1.76, 1.91], P = 0.247). In addition, no unexpected local signal changes or volume loss were seen on hypoglycemic participants' brain MRI scans. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that hypoglycemia related to T2DM treatment may not accentuate brain pathology, specifically brain atrophy or white matter abnormalities.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".