ArticleScientific reports2025
A prediction nomogram for mild cognitive impairment in type 2 diabetes mellitus based on the Chinese visceral adiposity index.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
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.
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.