Comparison of diabetes patients with “demyelinating” diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy to those diagnosed with <scp>CIDP</scp>
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We have previously identified a subset of diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy (DSP) patients with probable demyelination related to poor glycemic control. We aimed to determine whether the clinical characteristics and electrodiagnostic classification of nerve injury in diabetes patients with "demyelinating" DSP (D-DSP) differed from those diagnosed with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) (CIDP + diabetes mellitus [DM]). METHODS: D-DSP (56) and CIDP + DM (67) subjects underwent clinical examination and nerve conduction studies (NCS), and were compared using analysis of variance, contingency tables, and Kruskal-Wallis analyses. RESULTS: Of the 123 subjects with a mean age of 60.5 ± 15.6 years and mean hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) of 8.2 ± 2.2%, 54% had CIDP + DM and 46% had D-DSP. CIDP + DM subjects were older (P = 0.0003), had shorter duration of diabetes (P = 0.005), and more severe neuropathy as indicated by Toronto Clinical Neuropathy Score (TCNS) (P = 0.003), deep tendon reflexes (P = 0.02), and vibration perception thresholds (VPT) (P = 0.01, P = 0.02). The mean HbA1c value for D-DSP subjects (8.9 ± 2.3%) was higher than in CIDP + DM subjects (7.7 ± 2.0%, P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The clinical phenotype and electrophysiological profile of CIDP + DM patients is marked by more severe neuropathy and better glycemic control than in patients with D-DSP. These findings indicate that these two conditions - despite similarities in their electrophysiological pattern of demyelination - likely differ in etiology.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it