MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117930547 · doi:10.36552/pjns.v29i4.1186

Cognitive Dysfunction in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Correlation with Glycemic Control

2025· article· W7117930547 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zakirullah Khan, Dur-e-Sameen, Zarmina Gohar, Muhammad Ishaq, Rahman Rasheed, Asad Malik, Ismail Sheikh

Bibliographic record

VenuePakistan Journal Of Neurological Surgery · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlycemicCognitionType 2 diabetesObservational studyDiabetes mellitusNeurologyProspective cohort studyType 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: The study was conducted to evaluate the association between long-term glycemic control and cognitive function in patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM). Materials and Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted over six months from January to June 2024 at the Departments of Neurology and Internal Medicine, Lady Reading Hospital, Peshawar. A total of 200 patients aged 40 to 75 years with established T2DM were enrolled through non-probability consecutive sampling. Cognitive function was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment tool after cultural adaptation. Glycemic control was measured by HbA1c levels. Patients with psychiatric illness, stroke, dementia, or medications affecting cognition were excluded. The association between HbA1c and cognitive function was tested using Pearson correlation with significance at p >0.05. Conclusion: Poor glycemic control was strongly associated with cognitive dysfunction in T2DM. Routine cognitive screening is recommended in patients with poor metabolic control and longer disease duration.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 venuePakistan Journal Of Neurological SurgerySame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207