Progression in idiopathic, diabetic, paraproteinemic, alcoholic, and<scp>B12</scp>deficiency neuropathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We determined prospectively the clinical and electrophysiological progression of idiopathic, diabetic, paraproteinemic, alcoholic, and B12 deficiency neuropathy in 606 subjects over 3 years. We hypothesized that idiopathic peripheral neuropathy would demonstrate slower progression when compared with other etiologies. Laboratory assessments were used to determine the etiology of peripheral neuropathy at baseline and after 3 years. When compared with peripheral neuropathy related to type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus, subjects with idiopathic peripheral neuropathy progressed much slower, but demonstrated similar rates of progression to that of the other groups. Overall, detectable progression was minimal over 3 years. After 3 years, only 3% of cases of idiopathic peripheral neuropathy had any potentially identifiable causes discovered. Clinical and electrophysiological detection of very slow progression for these five types of peripheral neuropathy is possible using currently established clinical scales and standard electrophysiological techniques.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".