ArticleMedicine2025
Association between subtypes of diabetes and special sensations: A 2-sample Mendelian randomization study.
Article in Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Diabetes, a chronic condition affecting millions of individuals, is divided into type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D), each with unique pathophysiological characteristics. While the impact of diabetes on vision is established, its relationship with other special senses, balance, hearing, and olfaction, remains uncertain. This study utilized a 2-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) approach to investigate the associations between diabetes subtypes and specific sensory disorders. We performed MR analysis using various methods (inverse variance weighting [IVW], MR-Egger, simple mode, weighted mode, weighted median, MR-PRESSO) to assess the causal relationships between diabetes subtypes and sensory disorders (vestibular dysfunction, sensorineural hearing loss, conductive hearing loss, and olfactory dysfunction). Different diabetes genome-wide association studies datasets were utilized for validation. MR analysis revealed no significant correlations between T1D or T2D and the sensory disorders studied. Interestingly, an initial signal suggested that T1D might increase the risk of conductive hearing loss (IVW: odds ratio = 1.120, 95% CI: 1.035-1.211, P = .005), but this finding was not supported by validation studies. No evidence of horizontal pleiotropy or heterogeneity was found (P > .05). Our MR analysis and subsequent validation revealed no significant associations between diabetes subtypes and special senses. The initial suggestion of an increased risk of conductive hearing loss in T1D patients was not confirmed. Future research should further explore the intricate relationships among diabetes, sensory functions, and other factors, as well as the potential effects of diabetes management on sensory health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.