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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".