Cognition and BDNF levels in prediabetes and diabetes: A mediation analysis of a cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: Clinical and epidemiological studies suggest links between dementias and Type 2 diabetes (T2DM). The underlying mechanisms of diabetes-related cognitive impairment are largely unknown. This study aims to investigate the role of BDNF in cognitive impairment in prediabetes and T2DM. Methods: The study included 68 patients with prediabetes (preDM), 96 patients with T2DM, and 65 healthy controls. The cognitive function of the patients was evaluated with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) test and serum BDNF levels were measured by Elisa. The MoCA scores and BDNF levels were compared between diabetes groups after adjusting for age, gender, and education using ANCOVA. The role of BDNF in the diabetes-related cognitive impairment was investigated through mediation analysis. Results: Patients with T2DM had significantly lower cognitive performance, particularly in memory. Diabetes was found to be a predictor of both cognitive impairment and BDNF levels. A significant increase in serum BDNF levels was observed in patients with T2DM. However, the mediator role of BDNF in the pathology of cognitive impairment in diabetes was not determined. Conclusion: Cognitive impairment is prevalent in patients with T2DM and should be included in routine screening for complications. The results of the mediation analysis suggest that although BDNF is a biomarker affected by T2DM and cognition, it does not play a mediator role between cognitive impairment and diabetes.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".