Schizophrenia and type 2 diabetes risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: The metabolic syndrome in patients with schizophrenia has consistently been a challenge for clinicians. Previous studies indicate that individuals with schizophrenia are highly prone to developing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). In recent years, a continuous stream of new observational studies has been reported, emphasizing the pressing need for clinicians to gain a more precise understanding of the association between schizophrenia and T2DM. The objective of this meta-analysis is to integrate new observational studies and further explore the potential link between schizophrenia and the risk of T2DM. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science using medical subject headings (MeSH) and relevant keywords. The risk of bias in cohort studies and case-control studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), while cross-sectional studies were evaluated using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality scale (AHRQ), scoring was based on the content of the original studies. A fixed-effects model was employed if P > 0.1 and I2 ≤ 50%, indicating low heterogeneity. Conversely, a random-effects model was utilized if I2 > 50%, indicating substantial heterogeneity. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plots and Egger's test. Statistical analyses were carried out using Stata statistical software version 14.0. Results: This meta-analysis comprised 32 observational studies, involving a total of 2,007,168 patients with schizophrenia and 35,883,980 without schizophrenia, published from 2004 to 2023. The pooled analysis revealed a significant association between a history of schizophrenia and an increased risk of T2DM (Odds Ratio [OR] = 2.15; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.83-2.52; I2 = 98.9%, P < 0.001). Stratified by gender, females with schizophrenia (OR = 2.12; 95% CI: 1.70-2.64; I2 = 90.7%, P < 0.001) had a significantly higher risk of T2DM than males (OR = 1.68; 95% CI: 1.39-2.04; I2 = 91.3%, P < 0.001). Regarding WHO regions, EURO (OR = 2.73; 95% CI: 2.23-3.35; I2 = 97.5%, P < 0.001) exhibited a significantly higher risk of T2DM compared to WPRO (OR = 1.72; 95% CI: 1.32-2.23; I2 = 95.2%, P < 0.001) and AMRO (OR = 1.82; 95% CI: 1.40-2.37; I2 = 99.1%, P < 0.001). In terms of follow-up years, the >20 years subgroup (OR = 3.17; 95% CI: 1.24-8.11; I2 = 99.4%, P < 0.001) showed a significantly higher risk of T2DM than the 10-20 years group (OR = 2.26; 95% CI: 1.76-2.90; I2 = 98.6%, P < 0.001) and <10 years group (OR = 1.68; 95% CI: 1.30-2.19; I2 = 95.4%, P < 0.001). Conclusions: This meta-analysis indicates a strong association between schizophrenia and an elevated risk of developing diabetes, suggesting that schizophrenia may function as an independent risk factor for T2DM. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42023465826.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".