Effects of liraglutide on the cognitive function in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and the underlying mechanism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate the effects of liraglutide on cognitive function in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and the underlying Mechanism. Methods The cognitive function of type 2 diabetics treated in our hospital from November 2012 to May 2013 was evaluated with Montreal Cognitive Assessment(MoCA score). Subjects with cognitive dysfunction were screened out and divided into liraglutide group (LI group) or non-liraglutide group(NLI group). Patients in LI group were received liraglutide for 12 weeks. Patients in NLI group were given non- liraglutide drugs(such as insulin, metformin, acarbose, sulfonylureas, etc) for 12 weeks. The levels of serum Aβ, fasting plasma glucose, glycosylated hemoglobin, blood lipids, body weight were measured, and the cognitive function was evaluated again. The χ2 test or t text and the multiple factor correlation analysis were used for statistical analysis. Results In LI group, the cognitive function was improved in 44.2% (19/43) of patients. The overall MoCA score of (23.0±1.9) points rised up to (25.1±2.0) points. There were 19 cases in LI group whose post-treatment score reached (27.0±0.8) points. The difference was statistically significant(t=8.975, P 0.05). In LI group, Serum Aβ levels reduced from (266±98) ng/L to (256±96) ng/L, the body weight reduced from (83±12) kg to (80±11) kg. The difference was statistically significant(t=-2.76, -2.89, all P<0.01). While Aβ levels increased and body weight did not change significantly in NLI group. Correlation analysis showed that the improved cognitive function was relevant to the application of liraglutide (r=0.57, P<0.05), weight loss (r=-0.42, P<0.05) and Aβ decrease (r=-0.28, P<0.05) . Conclusion Liraglutide could improve the cognitive ability of type 2 diabetes patients and its mechanism might be relevant to the reduction of serum Aβ level and body weight. Key words: Diabetes mellitus, type 2; Liragluide; Impaired cognitive dysfunction; Amyloid protein, β
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".