High resolution ultrasonography of the tibial nerve in diabetic peripheral neuropathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM OF THE STUDY: High-resolution ultrasonography of the tibial nerve is a fast and non invasive tool for diagnosis of diabetic peripheral neuropathy. Our study was aimed at finding out the correlation of the cross sectional area and maximum thickness of nerve fascicles of the tibial nerve with the presence and severity of diabetic peripheral neuropathy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 75 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus clinically diagnosed with diabetic peripheral neuropathy were analysed, and the severity of neuropathy was determined using the Toronto Clinical Neuropathy Score. 58 diabetic patients with no clinical suspicion of diabetic peripheral neuropathy and 75 healthy non-diabetic subjects were taken as controls. The cross sectional area and maximum thickness of nerve fascicles of the tibial nerves were calculated 3 cm cranial to the medial malleolus in both lower limbs. RESULTS: and 0.30 mm respectively). CONCLUSION: The cross sectional area and maximum thickness of nerve fascicles of the tibial nerve is larger in diabetic patients with or without peripheral neuropathy than in healthy control subjects, and ultrasonography can be used as a good screening tool in these 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".