MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3216856006 · doi:10.52403/ijhsr.20211136

To Assess the Prevalence of Cognitive Impairment in Type II Diabetes Mellitus: An Observational Study

2021· article· en· W3216856006 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shivani D. Godhasara, Vaishali Suthar

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Health Sciences and Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMontreal Cognitive AssessmentDiabetes mellitusDementiaType 2 Diabetes MellitusCognitive impairmentInternal medicineCognitionType 2 diabetesDiseaseGuidelineObservational studyPhysical therapyPediatricsPsychiatryEndocrinologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Diabetes mellitus is a chronic metabolic disease characterized by hyperglycemia that affects various body systems. Elevated blood glucose levels cause brain malfunction, sorbitol which damages blood vessels, and degeneration of the nerves that can lead to dementia or cognitive impairment. Cognitive impairment can result in nonadherence of patients to diabetes treatment, such as medication, diet and exercise. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the prevalence of cognitive impairment in type II diabetes mellitus. Methodology: 50 participants of age group 30 - 60 years, both male and female were included in this study. Cognitive impairment was assessed with the English version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) tool. The MoCA scoring according to Dementia and Driving Safety: A clinical guideline, Version 3, 2014. Result: Among the 50 patients who were assessed, 24 (48%) were cognitively impaired. 20 (40%) of the subjects were age group of 51-60 years, and males participants 11(22%) outnumbered females 9 (18%). The majority of patients (40%) had diabetes type II for < 2 years. Conclusion: There was strong correlation found between Type II DM and cognitive impairment. Key words: Prevalence, Cognitive impairment, Diabetes mellitus Type II, Montreal Cognitive assessment (MoCA).

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)0.003
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.467
GPT teacher head0.541
Teacher spread0.075 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Health Sciences and ResearchSame topicNeurological Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207