MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405200629 · doi:10.1080/20905068.2024.2429302

Assessment of cognitive disorders in elderly type 2 diabetic patients with obesity

2024· article· en· W4405200629 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Azza H. Mohamed, Eman Youssef Moursy, A Sorial, Ali Mahmoud Ramadan

Bibliographic record

VenueAlexandria Journal of Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiet and metabolism studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePolypharmacyDiabetes mellitusDepression (economics)ObesityIncidence (geometry)Type 2 diabetesType 2 Diabetes MellitusBlood pressureChronic painCognitive impairmentGerontologyCognitionPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychiatryEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Cognitive impairment is common in the elderly and can result from many chronic illnesses. The risk of CI is around one-third for older persons with diabetes. Diabetes increases the incidence of numerous common geriatric syndromes in older persons, including polypharmacy, CI, depression, urine incontinence, injurious falls, and chronic pain. Additionally, obesity raises the risk of high blood pressure, and DM and promotes arterial aging, which are known to be independent risk factors for CI.Objective The current study evaluated cognitive disorders in elderly type 2 diabetic patients with obesity.Material and Methods A sample of 120 elderly persons was divided into 3 groups: Group (1): 40 elderly non-obese non-diabetics (Control), Group (2): 40 elderly obese non-diabetic patients, and Group (3): 40 elderly obese type 2 diabetic patients. Fasting plasma glucose (FPG), 2 hPPPG (2 hour post prandial plasma glucose), glycosylated hemoglobin (HA1C) were measured. Obesity was assessed using height, weight, body mass index (BMI), and waist circumference (WC). Cognitive impairment in the elderly was detected using a questionnaire called the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA).Results There was statistical significance between the three investigated groups concerning HbA1c, FPG, and 2-hour PPG. Also, there was statistical significance between the three study groups in terms of total MOCA score. Weight, BMI, and WC showed statistical significance between the three study groups.Conclusion: Cognitive impairment is related to obesity and type 2 diabetes in elderly.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlexandria Journal of MedicineSame topicDiet and metabolism studiesFrench-language works237,207