Type 1 diabetes-associated cognitive impairment and diabetic peripheral neuropathy in Chinese adults: results from a prospective cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background To compare neurocognitive functioning of Type 1 diabetic mellitus (T1DM) and healthy adults, and explore risk factors of cognitive dysfunction of T1DM patients, especially the association between cognitive impairment and diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). Methods Seventy T1DM (age: 32.17 ± 9.57 yr., duration: 8.99 ± 7.02 yr) patients and 48 healthy volunteers were included. All subjects received evaluation of MMSE and MoCA scales. Cognitive function of T1DM patients was evaluated in different cognitive domains. Risk factors affecting cognitive function were further explored. Results Three patients with educational level ≤ 6-year were excluded from final analysis. Scores of both MMSE (28.4 ± 1.7 vs. 29.1 ± 1.0, P = 0.005) and MoCA scales (25.9 ± 2.7 vs.27.1 ± 2.4, P = 0.017) in T1DM group were lower than that in control group. For MMSE scale, scores of orientation (9.60 ± 0.79 vs.9.87 ± 0.39, P < 0.001) and language function (8.56 ± 0.65 vs.8.83 ± 0.38, P < 0.001) in T1DM groups were lower than that in control group. For MoCA scale, scores of attention and concentration (2.30 ± 0.74 vs.2.57 ± 0.58, P < 0.001), visuospatial/executive function (4.32 ± 0.91 vs.4.64 ± 0.63, P < 0.001), memory (2.96 ± 1.50 vs.3.66 ± 1.28, P < 0.001), language function (5.71 ± 0.69 vs.5.87 ± 0.39, P = 0.007), and abstraction (1.55 ± 0.68 vs.1.82 ± 0.42, P < 0.001) were lower in T1DM group than that in control group. Logistic regression showed age, fasting C peptide, educational level and nerve conduction velocity (NCV) were associated with cognitive dysfunction diagnosed by MoCA scores for the patients with type 1 diabetes. Conclusions T1DM adults had mild to moderate cognitive impairment, mainly presenting as dysfunctions of attention and concentration, visuospatial/executive, language, and abstraction. In addition to age, fasting C peptide level, and educational level, DPN, as a diabetic complication, was identified to be associated with cognitive impairments.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".