MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of hypertriglyceridemic-waist phenotype on cognitive function in patients with type 2 diabetes

2017· article· en· W3032245113 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xin Gao, Qiukuan Shi, Huiyan Yu, Bin Qin, Fangkun Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueZhonghua laonian yixue zazhi · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWaistHypertriglyceridemiaMedicineInternal medicineType 2 diabetesCircumferenceMontreal Cognitive AssessmentAbdominal obesityCognitionObesityDiabetes mellitusGastroenterologyTriglycerideEndocrinologyCognitive impairmentPsychiatryCholesterolDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To investigate the effect of hypertriglyceridemic-waist(HTWC)phenotype on cognitive function in patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods According to the standard of plasma triglycerides concentration≥1.7 mmoL/L, waist circumference(WC)≥90 cm in men or ≥80 cm in women, 304 patients with type 2 diabetes were divided into four groups: normal triglycerides and waist circumference group(group A, n=65), normal waist circumference and hypertriglyceridemia group(group B, n=53), abdominal obesity and normal triglycerides group(group C, n=114), and HTWC group(group D, n=72)for prospective studies.Patients in four groups were surveyed with Mini-mental state examination(MMSE)and Montreal cognitive assessment(MOCA). And changes of cognitive function among the four groups were compared. Results Total score for the MMSE was significantly lower in group D than in group A(27.1±1.9 vs.29.0±1.3, F=2.869, P=0.019). The subscales of attention and calculation(4.0±1.4 vs.4.6±0.9, F=1.605, P=0.047)and recall(2.2±0.9 vs.2.6±0.6, F=1.959, P=0.043)were significantly lower in group D than in group A. Total score for the MOCA was significantly lower in group D than in group A(23.4±3.9 vs.25.9±3.6, F=1.975, P=0.031). The subscales of visuospatial and executive(3.5±1.4 vs.4.1±0.9, F=1.537, P=0.048), attention(5.1±1.4 vs.5.7±0.9, F=1.660, P=0.048)and orientation(5.6±1.0 vs.6.0±0.0, F=2.362, P=0.030)were significantly lower in group D than in group A. Conclusions There is a statistically more significant decline in cognitive function in patients with HTWC phenotype and the effective intervention and treatment are needed. Key words: Diabetes mellitus, type 2; Triglycerides; Cognition disorders

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.660

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZhonghua laonian yixue zazhiSame topicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207