Correlation of mild cognitive impairment with the thickness of retinal nerve fiber layer and serum indicators in type 2 diabetic patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cognitive Impairment arising from type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has garnered significant attention in recent times. However, there are few studies on the identification and diagnosis of markers of cognitive impairment. Notably, alterations in the Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer's (RNFL) thickness can potentially serve as an indicative measure of central nervous system changes. Further investigations have indicated that the decline in cognitive function within T2DM patients is intricately linked to persistent systemic inflammation and the accumulation of advanced glycosylation end products. Comprehensive studies are warranted to unveil these complex associations. Objective: This study aims to explore the potential of utilizing the RNFL thickness and serological concentrations of IL-18, irisin, CML, and RAGE as diagnostic indicators for Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) among individuals with T2DM. Methods: The thickness of RNFL were determined in all patients and controls using optical coherence tomography (OCT). The serum levels of IL-18, irisin, CML and RAGE were detected by ELISA kit. In addition, Cognitive assessment was performed by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Montreal Cognitive assessment (MoCA). Results: The average RNFL thickness in the right eye were decreased in T2DM and T2DM combined with MCI (T2DM-MCI) patients and were positively correlated with MoCA and MMSE scores. The serum levels of IL-18, CML and RAGE in T2DM and T2DM-MCI increased significantly (p<0.05) and were negative correlated with MoCA and MMSE scores. The level of irisin in T2DM and T2DM-MCI decreased significantly (p<0.05) and were positively correlated with MoCA and MMSE scores. The area under the ROC curve of T2DM-MCI predicted by the average RNFL thickness in the right eye, CML and RAGE were 0.853, 0.874 and 0.815. The diagnostic efficacy of the combination of average RNFL thickness in the right eye, CML, and RAGE for the diagnosis of T2DM-MCI was 0.969. Conclusion: The average RNFL thickness in the right eye, CML and RAGE have possible diagnostic value in T2DM-MCI patients.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".