Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peripheral neurons are targeted by a 'double hit' during diabetes mellitus. First, they are damaged directly; diabetic polyneuropathy is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder that involves sensory, autonomic and eventually motor neurons. The second 'hit' involves a profound impairment in the ability of peripheral axons to regenerate. This is important because the impairment impacts on how patients may recover from polyneuropathy. Moreover, diabetic patients also develop direct focal injures of peripheral nerves, such as carpal tunnel syndrome and ulnar neuropathy at the elbow. Their response to the treatment of these selective injuries is also impaired. Regeneration of peripheral neurons is normally a complex process that involves axon sprouting, upregulation of molecular regeneration programs, clearance of pathways for axon regrowth, maturation of new axons and reconnection to their targets. Schwann cells and perineuronal glial cells provide support during many of these processes. However, in diabetes mellitus a number of these steps may be independently impaired. In this brief article, we discuss evidence for several of these mechanisms of regenerative failure in diabetes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".