MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4403666006 · doi:10.7759/cureus.72227

Association of Hyperlipidemia and Hyperglycemia With Cognitive Function in Type 2 Diabetes: A Cross-Sectional Analysis

2024· article· en· W4403666006 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tasneem Ansari, Manish Sawane

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHyperlipidemiaCross-sectional studyDiabetes mellitusAssociation (psychology)Type 2 diabetesInternal medicineCognitionEndocrinologyPsychiatryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Cognitive impairment is increasingly recognized as a significant health concern, particularly in the early stages of diabetes. The type and severity of cognitive deficits may vary with the duration of diabetes and the effectiveness of glucose management. Complications associated with metabolic syndrome may exacerbate these cognitive declines. This study investigates the association of hyperlipidemia and hyperglycemia with cognitive function in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study on type 2 diabetic patients aged between 30 and 40 years of age and having the disease for less than 10 years duration. We collected anthropometric measurements, tested glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and fasting lipid profiles, and assessed cognitive function using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Results All participants exhibited elevated HbA1c levels and abnormal lipid profiles. We observed weak positive correlations between the duration of diabetes and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL; 0.448), very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (VLDL; 0.398), total cholesterol (0.526), and HbA1c (0.360). There were moderately negative correlations between the duration of diabetes and MoCA scores (-0.522) and weak negative correlations between LDL and MoCA (-0.304), VLDL and MoCA (-0.259), and total cholesterol and MoCA (-0.409). The correlation between HbA1c and MoCA was also moderately negative (-0.779). Regression analysis revealed statistically significant associations of MoCA with the duration of diabetes, HbA1c, and lipid parameters, with HbA1c being the largest contributor to cognitive decline at 60.66%, while the contributions of various lipid parameters were considerably lower (LDL: R² = 0.092, VLDL: R² = 0.067, total cholesterol: R² = 0.167). The contribution of the duration of diabetes (R² = 0.272) to cognitive decline was less than that of HbA1c but more than the lipid parameters. Conclusions The findings suggest that hyperglycemia and the duration of diabetes are the major factors contributing to cognitive decline in patients with T2D. Patients should be advised to maintain optimal glycemic control and engage in activities that enhance cognitive function to prevent cognitive impairment. Regular cognitive screening for diabetic patients is also recommended.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureus→Same topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins→French-language works237,207→