MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413805374 · doi:10.7860/jcdr/2025/76269.21454

Mild Cognitive Impairment and Hand Dexterity in Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Cross-sectional Study

2025· article· en· W4413805374 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S Shetty, Jayesh Chandran, Yughdtheswari Muniandy

Bibliographic record

VenueJOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCH · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCholinesterase and Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentDementiaCognitionMedicineCross-sectional studyCorrelationNormativeType 2 Diabetes MellitusCognitive impairmentDiabetes mellitusPsychologyAudiologyPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychiatryDiseasePathologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) presents various complications, but Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) has recently gained considerable attention due to its potential progression to dementia. Hand dexterity is highlighted as crucial for cognitive tasks, suggesting that even minor cognitive impairments can impact daily activities. Despite this, there has been no exploration of the relationship between MCI and hand dexterity in individuals with T2DM. Aim: To determine the relationship between MCI and hand dexterity in people with T2DM. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study included 45 diabetic patients aged 40-60 years from Justice KS Hegde Charitable Hospital in Mangaluru, Karnataka, India. The study was conducted from May 2023 to March 2024. Participants were recruited based on specific inclusion criteria and screened using tools such as the Semmes Weinstein Monofilament and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Subsequently, selected participants underwent the hand dexterity test using the Box and Block Test (BBT) and their performance values were recorded. The categorical variables were presented as frequency and percentage. The continuous variables were presented as mean±SD. Correlation was performed using Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Linear regression was conducted for significant correlations. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Individuals in the study scored lower than expected values on both right and left hand tasks compared to normative scores. Moderate positive correlations were found between BBT scores and MoCA scores for both right (r-value=0.469, p-value=0.001) and left (r-value=0.516, p-value <0.001) hand tasks with p-value <0.05. Conclusion: The study reveals a significant positive correlation between BBT and MoCA scores. This suggests that hand dexterity is closely linked to cognitive function, emphasising the importance of integrating manual dexterity assessments into cognitive evaluations, particularly in populations where both motor and cognitive abilities are clinically relevant.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.365 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCHSame topicCholinesterase and Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207