MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060377359 · doi:10.2337/dc14-2114

Corneal Confocal Microscopy Predicts 4-Year Incident Peripheral Neuropathy in Type 1 Diabetes

2015· article· en· W2060377359 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes Care · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePeripheral neuropathyReceiver operating characteristicDiabetes mellitusOphthalmologyType 2 diabetesRetinopathyInternal medicineNephropathyArea under the curveSensory thresholdType 1 diabetesEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study determined if deficits in corneal nerve fiber length (CNFL) assessed using corneal confocal microscopy (CCM) can predict future onset of diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: CNFL and a range of other baseline measures were compared between 90 nonneuropathic patients with type 1 diabetes who did or did not develop DPN after 4 years. The receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine the capability of single and combined measures of neuropathy to predict DPN. RESULTS: DPN developed in 16 participants (18%) after 4 years. Factors predictive of 4-year incident DPN were lower CNFL (P = 0.041); longer duration of diabetes (P = 0.002); higher triglycerides (P = 0.023); retinopathy (higher on the Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study scale) (P = 0.008); nephropathy (higher albumin-to-creatinine ratio) (P = 0.001); higher neuropathy disability score (P = 0.037); lower cold sensation (P = 0.001) and cold pain (P = 0.027) thresholds; higher warm sensation (P = 0.008), warm pain (P = 0.024), and vibration (P = 0.003) thresholds; impaired monofilament response (P = 0.003); and slower peroneal (P = 0.013) and sural (P = 0.002) nerve conduction velocity. CCM could predict the 4-year incident DPN with 63% sensitivity and 74% specificity for a CNFL threshold cutoff of 14.1 mm/mm(2) (area under ROC curve = 0.66, P = 0.041). Combining neuropathy measures did not improve predictive capability. CONCLUSIONS: DPN can be predicted by various demographic, metabolic, and conventional neuropathy measures. The ability of CCM to predict DPN broadens the already impressive diagnostic capabilities of this novel ophthalmic marker.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.800

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.237 · 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