Lack of Motor Progression in Isolated Sensory Peripheral Neuropathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nerve conduction studies (NCS) and electromyography (EMG) studies are critical for the detection, diagnosis, and characterization of peripheral neuropathy (PN).Although NCS and EMG abnormalities are often compared to clinical findings, these data are not always concordant.Examples of this discordance include patients with small fiber PN having severe deficits of nociceptive and thermal function but normal NCS 1 , or patients with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease type 1A with minimal symptoms but florid NCS changes 2,3 .The utility of using NCS/EMG for prediction of later clinical outcomes is also unclear in many forms of PN [4][5][6] .We prospectively identified and followed patients with isolated sensory PN (ISPN) based upon a lower limb stocking pattern of sensory loss for nociception, thermal sensation, vibration threshold and/or proprioception with initially normal motor strength, tone, reflexes and muscle bulk.The objective of this study was to determine if patients with initial ISPN go on to develop clinical and or electrophysiologic progression of motor deficits.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".