UNCONTROLLED DIABETES AS FACTOR AFFECTING COGNITIVE FUNCTION IN TYPE 2 DIABETES MELLITUS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Impairment or decline in cognitive function can be caused by various things, one of which is uncontrolled diabetes. In Indonesia, the research on the effect of blood sugar levels on cognitive function has been done, but still limited and less were using HbA1c. Objective: This research aims to find correlation between HbA1C level and cognitive function based on MoCA-Ina. Methods: This is a cross sectional study with a sample of 130 type 2 diabetes mellitus patients at Siloam Hospital Karawaci through a non-randomized purposive sampling method. Data collection was taken on January to May 2020 using medical record data for glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels (cut off score 7%) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment ver. Indonesia (MoCA-Ina) score (cut off score 26) to evaluate the cognitive function. Statistical bivariate analysis performed using chi-square and multivariate analysis covariate variables using logistic regression. Results: Uncontrolled diabetes mellitus as shown by a high HbA1c level were significantly increase the risk of cognitive decline. The study showed a significant relationship between HbA1c levels with cognitive function (OR=5,98; CI 95% 2,25-15,58; p=0,000). A logistic regression analysis of various cognitive functions showed that memory was the most affected domain in patient with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes. Conclusion: Uncontrolled diabetes mellitus as shown by a high HbA1c level were significantly increase the risk of cognitive decline and the most affected domain was memory.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".