84 Does Dual-Task Gait Speed Predict Cognitive Performance in Midlife Type 2 Diabetes? Baseline Results from the ENBIND Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Type 2 Diabetes (T2DM) in midlife is associated with a greater risk of dementia in later life. The longitudinal ENBIND Study is examining novel approaches to biomarker discovery in this high-risk group which may help identify those at greatest risk Methods Non-demented participants with midlife T2DM (no micro/macrovascular complications) and matched controls were recruited. Following detailed health/diabetes assessment, general cognitive (MoCA) and computerised neuropsychological (CANTAB) assessment were performed. Gait was assessed by stopwatch and accelerometers across several tasks including self-selected and maximal gait speed in addition to a dual-task cognitive paradigm (reciting alternate letters of the alphabet). Bloods were analysed for C-Reactive Protein (CRP) and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c). Between group differences were analysed using t-tests/non-parametric equivalents and linear regression used for multivariate analysis. Results Sixty participants with T2DM (51.9 +/- 8.4 yrs) and 30 matched controls (52.3 +/- 7.9 yrs) were recruited. Controlling for demographic and cardiovascular covariates, T2DM was associated with a lower MoCA score, slower self-selected, maximal and dual-task gait speed (all p<0.05). Maximal gait speed (p =0.006) but not self-selected gait speed (p =0.47) was associated with poorer cognitive function. On multivariate analysis of the dual-task difference, both T2DM and lower MoCA score were associated with a poorer performance, (p<0.001, p= 0.003). Overall, performance in the lowest vs highest quartile on the dual-task gait paradigm was associated with a significantly poorer performance on the MoCA (p<0.001; median 27 vs 29). On multivariate analysis of laboratory parameters, higher CRP levels were associated with slower maximal (p =0.041) and dual-task (p=0.033) gait performance. Conclusion Midlife T2DM is associated with poorer cognitive performance. Gait speed, and in particular dual-task gait speed, correlate strongly with general cognitive performance. Future work will tease out the specific domains of gait and cognition which are affected, and assess longitudinally in this high-risk group.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".