Effect of epalrestat combined with methylcobalamin on senior′s diabetic peripheral neuropathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To observe the curative effect of epalrestat combined with methylcobalamin on the senior′s diabetic peripheral neuropathy(DPN).Methods 100 senior patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy were randomly divided into two groups.Treatment group(n=50)received epalrestat combined with methylcobalamin.Control group(n=50)received only methylcobalamin.The changes of TCSS(Toronto clinical scoring system)scores,motor and sensory nerve conduction velocity(MCV and SCV)of bilateral common peroneal nerve after 12 weeks were analyzed.Results After treatment,TCSS scores and conduction velocity(MCV and SCV)of bilateral common peroneal nerve of the 2 groups were obviously improved(P0.05),and significant differences were observed between the 2 groups(P0.05).Conclusion Epalrestat combined with methylcobalamin has ideal clinical curative effect on senior′s diabetic peripheral neuropathy,and it is superior to single drug treatment.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".