MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2373980431

Relationship between transforming growth factor beta 1 and peripheral neuropathy in type 2 diabetic

2013· article· en· W2373980431 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Quanmin Li

Bibliographic record

VenueBeijing Medical Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolism, Diabetes, and Cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePeripheral neuropathyInternal medicineDiabetes mellitusPeripheralLogistic regressionTransforming growth factorHemoglobinType 2 diabetesEndocrinologyGastroenterologyRisk factor
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To investigate the relationship between transforming growth factor beta 1(TGFβ1) and peripheral neuropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes(DPN).Methods According to Toronto rating system,85 Type 2 diabetic mellitus(T2DM) patients were graded into A,B1,B2,and B3 stages based on the severity.The serum levels of TGFβ1,glycosylated hemoglobin(HbA1c) and lipids,as well as renal function were detected and analyzed among the different groups.Results Serum levels of TGFβ1 were higher in total diabetes groups than in control group [(22.3 ±1.6) pg/ml vs.(17.4±0.2) pg/ml,P 0.01].Serum levels of TGFβ1 were higher in patients with DPN than patients without DPN [(22.1±1.8)pg/ml vs.(21.2±0.3) pg/ml,P 0.05].With the increase of DPN severity,the serum levels of TGFβ1 dropped(P 0.01).In a Logistic regression model,taking DPN as a dependent variable,the duration of diabetes was significantly associated with the severity of DPN(P 0.01).Conclusion High serum levels of TGFβ1 may be useful for the early diagnosis of DPN,and the duration of diabetes may be a risk factor for the development of peripheral neuropathy in T2DM 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.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBeijing Medical JournalSame topicMetabolism, Diabetes, and CancerFrench-language works237,207