The Effects of Cilostazol on Peripheral Neuropathy in Diabetic Patients With Peripheral Arterial Disease
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evidence from diabetic animal models suggests that cilostazol, a cyclic AMP phosphodiesterase inhibitor used in the treatment of claudication, is efficacious in the treatment of peripheral neuropathy, although this is unproven in humans. The main aim of this study was to assess the effects of cilostazol on neuropathic symptomatology in diabetic patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD). METHODS: Diabetic patients with PAD were prospectively recruited to a randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trial. Baseline clinical data were recorded prior to trial commencement following medical optimization. Neurological assessment included the Toronto Clinical Neuropathy Scoring system (TCNS) and vibration perception thresholds (VPT) with a neurothesiometer at baseline, 6 weeks, and 24 weeks. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were recruited from December 2004 to January 2006, which included 20 males. Baseline patient allocation to treatment arms was matched for age, sex, and medical comorbidities. There was no significant difference in neurological assessment between the treatment groups using the TCNS and VPT at 6 and 24 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Despite extensive animal-based evidence that cilostazol attenuates neuropathic symptomatology, our results do not support this effect in human diabetic PAD patients.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it