| Title |
The chicken or the egg? Does glycaemic control predict cognitive function or the other way around?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Diabetologia, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00125-018-4689-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ithamar Ganmore, Michal Schnaider Beeri |
| Abstract |
The association between type 2 diabetes and cognitive dysfunction is well established. Prevention of the development of type 2 diabetes and its complications, as well as cognitive dysfunction and dementia, are leading goals in these fields. Deciphering the causality direction of the interplay between type 2 diabetes and cognitive dysfunction, and understanding the timeline of disease progression, are crucial for developing efficient prevention strategies. The prevailing perception is that type 2 diabetes leads to cognitive dysfunction and dementia. There is substantial evidence showing that accelerated cognitive decline in type 2 diabetes starts in midlife (mean age 40-60 years) and that it may even begin at the prediabetes stage. However, in this issue of Diabetologia, Altschul et al (doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00125-018-4645-8 ) show evidence for the reverse causality hypothesis, i.e. that lower cognitive function precedes poor glycaemic control. They found that cognitive function at early adolescence (age 11 years) predicts both HbA1c levels and cognitive function at age 70 years. Moreover, they found that lower cognitive function at age 70 is associated with an increase in HbA1c from age 70 to 79 years. Based on these findings, future studies should explore whether developing prevention strategies that target young adolescents with lower cognitive function will result in prevention of type 2 diabetes, breaking the vicious cycle of type 2 diabetes and cognitive dysfunction. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 25% |
| Australia | 1 | 13% |
| Spain | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 63% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 25% |
| Scientists | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 35 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Researcher | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 13 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Psychology | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 16 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 August 2018.
All research outputs
#6,836,254
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Diabetologia
#2,690
of 5,096 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,957
of 326,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetologia
#51
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,096 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.7. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,948 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.