MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325446501 · doi:10.1586/17446651.2016.1145050

Current Ideas on the Treatment Of Diabetic Neuropathies

2016· article· en· W2325446501 on OpenAlexaff
Dustin Anderson, Douglas W. Zochodne

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Endocrinology & Metabolism · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCarpal tunnel syndromeDiabetic neuropathyEntrapment NeuropathyPolyneuropathyDiabetes mellitusComplicationUlnar neuropathyQuality of life (healthcare)Physical therapyElbowPhysical medicine and rehabilitationNeuropathic painIntensive care medicineSurgeryUlnar nerveAnesthesiaEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diabetic neuropathies are common and their prevalence is rising with the growth in the global prevalence of type 2 diabetes. Several patterns of neuropathy have now been described, with diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy (DPN) being the most common. Autonomic neuropathy, entrapment neuropathies including carpal tunnel syndrome and ulnar neuropathy at the elbow pose additional burdens. DPN can be detected in over half of all diabetic subjects and approximately 20% of all patients with DPN also experience neuropathic pain, a complication with major impacts on quality of life. Currently, the only available treatments for DPN are optimal glucose control and pain management, whereas interventions, beyond optimizing hyperglycemic control, to address the underlying polyneuropathy are not available. Here we review current treatment options and new literature relating to DPN, with an emphasis on novel and emerging treatments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.306 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Endocrinology & MetabolismSame topicPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207