A prediction nomogram for mild cognitive impairment in type 2 diabetes mellitus based on the Chinese visceral adiposity index
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Visceral adiposity has been proposed to be closely linked to cognitive impairment. This cross-sectional study aimed to evaluate the predictive value of Chinese Visceral Adiposity Index (CVAI) for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and to develop a quantitative risk assessment model. A total of 337 hospitalized patients with T2DM were included and randomly assigned to a training cohort (70%, n = 236) and a validation cohort (30%, n = 101). Demographic, clinical, and neuropsychological data were collected. CVAI levels were compared between patients with MCI and those with normal cognition. Associations between CVAI and cognitive performance were assessed using Spearman correlation and multivariable linear regression. Predictors of MCI were identified through Lasso regression followed by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. A nomogram incorporating age, gender, education level, and CVAI was constructed and validated using calibration plots, ROC curve analysis, and decision curve analysis (DCA). Patients with MCI exhibited significantly higher CVAI values and lower MoCA and MMSE scores compared to those with normal cognition (all P < 0.001). CVAI was independently and negatively associated with MoCA and MMSE scores (β = -0.22, P < 0.001 for both) after adjustment. Multivariate logistic regression confirmed CVAI as an independent risk factor for MCI (P = 0.002). The nomogram demonstrated good discrimination, with an AUC of 0.765 in the training cohort and 0.690 in the validation cohort, and exhibited favorable clinical utility based on DCA. These findings suggest that CVAI is a valuable biomarker for the early identification and risk stratification of MCI in T2DM, and that the CVAI-based nomogram provides a practical tool for individualized clinical decision-making.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".