Walking Speed is the Sole Determinant of mild Cognitive Impairment in Japanese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background To elucidate the clinical characteristics of type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and to examine whether diagnosis of sarcopenia and/or its criterion are explanatory factors for MCI Methods Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus were categorized into the MCI group for MoCA-J (the Japanese version of the Montreal cognitive assessment) score <26, and into the non-MCI group for MoCA-J ≥26. Sarcopenia was defined by a low skeletal mass index along with low muscle strength (handgrip strength) or low physical performance (walking speed <1.0 m/s). Univariate and multivariate-adjusted odds ratio models were used to determine the independent contributors for MoCA-J <26. Results Among 438 participants, 221 (50.5%) and 217 (49.5%) comprised the non-MCI and MCI groups, respectively. In the MCI group, age (61 ± 12 vs. 71 ± 10 years, p < 0.01) and duration of diabetes (14 ± 9 vs. 17 ± 9 years, p < 0.01) were higher than those in the non-MCI group. Patients in the MCI group exhibited lower hand grip strength, walking speed, and skeletal mass index, but higher prevalence of sarcopenia. Only walking speed (rather than muscle loss or muscle weakness) was found to be an independent determinant of MCI after adjusting for multiple factors, such as age, gender, BMI, duration of diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, smoking, drinking, eGFR, HbA1c, and history of coronary heart diseases and stroke. In subgroup analysis, a group consisting of male patients aged ≥65 years, with BMI <25, showed a significant OR for walking speed. Conclusions This is the first study to show that slow walking speed is a determinant for the presence of MCI in patients with type 2 diabetes. It was suggested that walking speed is an important factor in the prediction and prevention of MCI development in patients with diabetes mellitus.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".