Study on the correlation between abnormal bone metabolism and cognitive impairment in type 2 diabetes mellitus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is often accompanied by bone metabolic disorders and cognitive impairment, forming an interactive network through metabolic derangements, oxidative stress, and inflammatory responses. Hyperglycemia and insulin resistance disrupt bone remodeling leading to osteoporosis while simultaneously impairing cognition via blood-brain barrier damage and neuroinflammation. Osteogenic factors like osteocalcin may bidirectionally regulate glucose metabolism and brain function, suggesting that “bone-brain axis” dysregulation could be a potential mechanism underlying cognitive impairment in T2DM. This study aims to characterize cognitive function patterns in T2DM patients with bone metabolic abnormalities and their clinical correlations, providing a basis for multisystemic interventions. Methods The general clinical data, osteocalcin (OC), glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), bone mineral density (BMD), and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scores of 50 patients with T2DM were collected. According to whether cognitive impairment occurred or not, one-way ANOVA was performed to analyze the correlation between cognitive and clinical indicators, BMD and OC. Multiple linear regression analysis was performed with cognition and bone density as dependent variables and other factors as independent variables. Results T2DM subjects were grouped according to bone mass. The osteoporosis group had the lowest MoCA score and bone density, followed by the osteopenia group. There were 16 cases (16/17 94.12%) of cognitive impairment in the osteoporosis group, 13 cases (13/17 76.47%) of cognitive impairment in the osteopenia group, and 3 cases (3/16 18.75%) of cognitive impairment in the normal bone mass group. Compared with the normal cognitive group, the MoCA score, OC measurement and BMD of the patients in the cognitive impairment group were lower (P < 0.05). BMD (r = 0.686, P = 0.000), OC (r = 0.756, P = 0.000) are positively correlated with MoCA score. OC (r = 0.690, P = 0.000) and Age (r = −0.032, P = 0.045) are positively correlated with BMD. Multivariate linear regression analysis found that with cognition as the dependent variable, the decrease in BMD (P = 0.028) and OC (P = 0.000) aggravated the occurrence of cognitive impairment; with BMD as the dependent variable, the decline in cognition (P = 0.028) and OC (P = 0.029) aggravated the decrease in BMD. Conclusion T2DM, osteoporosis, and cognitive impairment form pathological connections through metabolic disorders, chronic inflammation, and bidirectional regulatory networks of the “bone-brain axis,” with osteocalcin serving as a key mediator that maintains bone remodeling balance while also exerting cross-domain regulation over central insulin signaling and synaptic plasticity. Understanding these interactive mechanisms provides a basis for developing combined screening models integrating bone density and cognitive assessments, and promotes multidisciplinary collaborative interventions across endocrinology, orthopedics, and neurology to improve overall outcomes for T2DM 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".