MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215449875 · doi:10.12998/wjcc.v9.i33.10161

Association between plasma dipeptidyl peptidase-4 levels and cognitive function in perinatal pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus

2021· article· en· W3215449875 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Si-Ri-Gu-Leng Sana, En-You Li, Xijin Deng, Lei Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Clinical Cases · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeptidase Inhibition and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGestational diabetesGlycated hemoglobinMontreal Cognitive AssessmentInternal medicineVenous bloodDiabetes mellitusBrain-derived neurotrophic factorPregnancyObstetricsEndocrinologyGastroenterologyType 2 diabetesGestationNeurotrophic factorsCognitive impairmentDiseaseReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) is associated with cognitive dysfunction in patients with type 2 diabetes. AIM: To assess a possible relationship between serum DPP4 and cognitive function in perinatal pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). METHODS: = 51). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was used to assess the cognitive status of each group. Venous blood samples were collected to measure blood lipids, glycated hemoglobin, and glucose levels. For each participant, a 3-mL blood sample was collected and centrifuged, and the serum was collected. Blood samples were stored at -80 ℃, and DPP4, interleukin-6 (IL-6), and 8-iso-prostaglandin F2α (8-iso-PGF2α), and brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) were detected using ELISA. RESULTS: > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Cognitive dysfunction in perinatal pregnant women with GDM mainly manifested as memory loss, which might be associated with elevated DPP4 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of Clinical CasesSame topicPeptidase Inhibition and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207