Relationship Between Cognitive Functions and Insulin-degrading Enzyme in Individuals With Prediabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Individuals with diabetes can develop cognitive impairment due to dysfunction of glucose metabolism; however, it remains unclear whether cognition becomes altered in the prediabetic stage. Substantial evidence links cognitive impairment in diabetes to aberrant serum insulin-degrading enzyme (s[IDE]) levels. This relationship remains to be investigated in individuals with prediabetes. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between cognitive function and s[IDE] levels in individuals with prediabetes. METHOD: The study group consisted of 47 individuals who had been diagnosed with prediabetes and 41 healthy controls. Cognitive functions were evaluated using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and s[IDE] levels were measured using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. RESULTS: The MoCA total scores and s[IDE] levels of the individuals with prediabetes were significantly lower (P = 0.001, 0.006) than those of the controls, and the MoCA Attention measure of the individuals with prediabetes was also very low (P = 0.001). To determine cognitive impairment, we divided the prediabetics into two subgroups according to the MoCA cutoff value. Scores on all of the MoCA tests were significantly lower in the group with mild cognitive impairment (P < 0.05). There was no correlation between MoCA scores and s[IDE] levels (P > 0.05), but serum-fasting glucose levels showed a negative correlation with MoCA scores (P < 0.05, ρ = -0.287). CONCLUSION: Evidence of mild cognitive impairment was high in the individuals with prediabetes and showed a negative correlation with serum-fasting glucose levels but not with s[IDE] levels.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".