Electrophysiologic correlations with clinical outcomes in CIDP
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data are lacking on correlations between changes in nerve conduction (NC) studies and treatment response in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP). This report examined data from a randomized, double-blind trial of immune globulin intravenous, 10% caprylate/chromatography purified (IGIV-C [Gamunex]; n = 59) versus placebo (n = 58) every 3 weeks for up to 24 weeks in CIDP. Motor NC results and clinical measures were assessed at baseline and endpoint/week 24. Improvement from baseline in adjusted inflammatory neuropathy cause and treatment score correlated with improvement in proximally evoked compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitudes (r = -0.53; P < 0.001) of all nerves tested and with improvement in CMAP amplitude of the most severely affected motor nerve (r = -0.36; P < 0.001). Correlations were observed between improvement in averaged CMAP amplitudes and dominant-hand grip strength (r = 0.44; P < 0.001) and Medical Research Council sum score (r = 0.38; P < 0.001). Overall, the change in electrophysiologic measures of NC in CIDP correlated with clinical response to treatment.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".