The Correlation of Arboviruses With the Risk of Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Current Evidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arboviruses have become endemic worldwide in the recent years. Growing evidence have shown that diabetes increases the risk of severe complications these virus infections, but previous results is conflicting. This systematic review and meta-analysis reassessed the data associated with this correlation to response to the question of whether patients with diabetes have an elevated susceptibility to virus. Four electronic databases of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science (WoS) and Embase were searched as systematic to evoke relevant data to the risk of virus infection in individuals with diabetes up to January 31, 2025. A random-effects model was used to estimate the summary odds ratio (OR). Subgroup analyses depending on the geographic area, clinical symptoms of virus, study design and the diagnostic techniques of virus were conducted. Quality appraisal for primary outcome and quality assessment was preformed by the Grading of recommendation, assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) and Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS), respectively. This study was registered with PROSPERO, code (CRD42025638835). In total, 33 studies were identified based on different in virus type and phenotype of diabetes. The summary OR between virus infection and the risk of diabetes was (0.81, [95% CI 0.51-1.12], p < 0.05). The separate analysis for each of virus showed an increased risk of severe clinical symptoms of both DENV (OR = 1.04, [95% CI 0.53-1.55], p = 0.00) and WNV (OR = 1.94, [95% CI 1.02-2.87], p = 0.00) except CHIKV (OR = 0.24, [95% CI -0.28-0.76], p = 0.36). No publication bias was observed using Begg's (p = 0.54) and Egger's (P = 0.38) tests. Subgroups of geographic area and severe clinical symptoms of viruses such as dengue fever and West Nile fever had higher risk in diabetic patients. Our results provide strong evidence suggesting the association between diabetes and higher risk of DENV and WNV. These findings will help to physicians to early detection and appropriate management for reducing the morbidity and mortality rates in diabetes patients with DENV and WNV. As a result, diabetes involvement in Arboviruses is usual, especially in DENV and WNV 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 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 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".