Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the extent to which Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is associated with impairments in executive function (EF). METHODS: Medline, PsychoInfo, and Scopus databases and published references were used to identify articles examining the association between T2DM status (case versus control) and EF decrements. Results from studies were converted to standardized mean differences and compared using random-effects models. Moderator analysis was conducted for age, sex, and diabetes duration using maximum likelihood estimation. RESULTS: Sixty studies (59 articles) including 9815 individuals with T2DM and 69,254 controls were included. Findings indicated a small but reliable association between T2DM status and EF decrements (d = -0.248, p < .001), observed across all aspects of EF examined: verbal fluency, mental flexibility, inhibition, working memory, and attention. Disease duration significantly moderated the effect of T2DM status on EF. CONCLUSIONS: T2DM is associated with a mild-to-moderate EF decrements. Such decrements are stronger among those with shorter disease duration.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".