MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2588483023 · doi:10.1136/bmjdrc-2016-000251

Using in vivo corneal confocal microscopy to identify diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy risk profiles in patients with type 1 diabetes

2017· article· en· W2588483023 on OpenAlexafffund
Evan J.H. Lewis, Bruce A. Perkins, Leif E. Lovblom, Richard P. Bazinet, Thomas M.S. Wolever, Vera Bril

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersBanting and Best Diabetes Centre, University of TorontoCanadian Diabetes Association
KeywordsMedicineDiabetes mellitusConfocal microscopyType 2 diabetesIn vivoNerve fiberInternal medicineOphthalmologyEndocrinologyBiologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective Diabetic sensorimotor peripheral neuropathy (DSP) is the most prevalent complication in diabetes mellitus. Identifying DSP risk is essential for intervening early in the natural history of the disease. Small nerve fibers are affected earliest in the disease progression and evidence of this damage can be identified using in vivo corneal confocal microscopy (IVCCM). Research design and methods We applied IVCCM to a cohort of 40 patients with type 1 diabetes to identify their DSP risk profile. We measured standard IVCCM parameters including corneal nerve fiber length (CNFL), and performed nerve conduction studies and quantitative sensory testing. Results 40 patients (53% female), with a mean age of 48±14, BMI 28.1±5.8, and diabetes duration of 27±18 years were enrolled between March 2014 and June 2015. Mean IVCCM CNFL was 12.0±5.2 mm/mm 2 (normal ≥15 mm/mm 2 ). Ten patients (26%) without DSP were identified as being at risk of future DSP with mean CNFL 11.0±2.1 mm/mm 2 . Six patients (15%) were at low risk of future DSP with mean CNFL 19.0±4.6 mm/mm 2 , while 23 (59%) had established DSP with mean CNFL 10.5±4.5 mm/mm 2 . Conclusions IVCCM can be used successfully to identify the risk profile for DSP in patients with type 1 diabetes. This methodology may prove useful to classify patients for DSP intervention clinical trials.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.369 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations17
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open Diabetes Research & CareSame topicOcular Surface and Contact LensFrench-language works237,207