Intravenous Immunoglobulins (IVIG) in Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy ( CIDP ): time to maximal recovery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The response of Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy ( CIDP ) to Intravenous Immunoglobulins (IVIG) treatment is well established. However, determination whether patients who do not respond to 2 IVIG treatments or those whose condition stabilizes (ICE Trial) would benefit from additional treatments remains unclear. We aim to identify time period required to reach maximal strength gains from IVIG treatment (plateau). Furthermore, we will assess nerve conduction studies (NCS) changes over time with IVIG treatment. This will help in establishing a time course for treatment of CIDP with IVIG to maximize recovery. Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of 27 patients with CIDP, with diagnosis confirmed by European Federation of Neurological Societies/Peripheral Nerve Society Guidelines (EFNS/PNS). Each patient’s strength response including: grip strength, knee extension, elbow flexion and dorsiflexion (using JAMAR Dynamometer) and NCS changes over time during IVIG treatment were analyzed. The primary outcome is duration of IVIG treatment, in months, required to reach a plateau in strength. Secondary outcome is NCS change including: Terminal Latencies, Conduction Velocities, Compound Sensory and Motor action potentials in nerves of upper and lower extremities over treatment time (emerging trends). Results: Pending (available by April 2015) Conclusion: Pending (available by April 2015)
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".