Cognitive Function in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients Taking Metformin and Metformin-Sulfonylurea
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The most prescribed antidiabetic drugs in Indonesian primary health care are metformin or a combination of metformin and sulfonylurea. Studies on metformin have shown various impacts on cognitive decline in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, whereas sulfonylurea has been shown to reduce this impact. This study aimed to compare the impacts of metformin and metformin-sulfonylurea on cognitive function and determine what factors affected it. This cross-sectional study was conducted at Pasar Minggu Primary Health Care involving 142 type 2 diabetes mellitus patients taking metformin or metformin-sulfonylurea for > 6 months and aged > 36 years. Cognitive function was assessed using the validated Montreal Cognitive Assessment Indonesian version. The effects of metformin and metformin-sulfonylurea on cognitive decline showed no significant difference, even after controlling for covariates (aOR = 1.096; 95% CI = 0.523–2.297; p-value = 0.808). Multivariate analysis showed age (OR = 4.131; 95% CI = 1.271–13.428; p-value = 0.018) and education (OR = 2.746; 95% CI = 1.196–6.305; p-value = 0.017) affected cognitive function. Since a lower education and older age are likely to cause cognitive decline, health professionals are encouraged to work with public health experts to address these risk factors for cognitive function.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it