Analysis of cognitive status in patients with type 2 diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cognitive impairment is a common complication of type 2 diabetes, greatly reduce the quality of life and daily functioning of patients, as well as have an impact on their compliance to therapy. Aim: Explore the nature and frequency of cognitive impairment in patients with type 2 diabetes, their relation to carbohydrate metabolism. Materials and methods: The study involved 113 patients with type 2 diabetes aged 4070 years, with disease duration of more than 12 months; Control group consisted of 33 persons, stateless persons with type 2 diabetes, matched by age, sex, level of education, the presence of cardiovascular diseases such as hypertension and coronary heart disease. The complex included a survey of clinical and laboratory tests, instrumental, neuropsychological testing. To screen for cognitive impairment used by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale (MоСа test), for the study of the frontal functions FAB (frontal dysfunction battery). Results: The study of cognitive impairment were diagnosed in 53,1 9,2% of patients with type 2 diabetes, which is statistically significantly higher than in those in the control group 15,2 12,2%. In patients with type 2 diabetes prevailed violations fronto-subcortical type with a reduction in short-term memory function, attention and constructive praxis. Cognitive impairment correlated with indices of carbohydrate metabolism (HbA1c, fasting glucose), disease duration 7 [5, 12] years and the patient's. Conclusions: These data confirm the impact of hyperglycemia as a major pathogenic factor and duration of the disease on the formation and progression of cognitive impairment in patients with type 2 diabetes.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".