MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806995405 · doi:10.1007/s00125-018-4653-8

Corneal confocal microscopy for identification of diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy: a pooled multinational consortium study

2018· article· en· W2806995405 on OpenAlexafffund
Bruce A. Perkins, Leif E. Lovblom, Vera Bril, Daniel Scarr, Ilia Ostrovski, Andrej Orszag, Katie Edwards, Nicola Pritchard, Anthony Russell, Cirous Dehghani, Danièle Pacaud, Kenneth Romanchuk, Jean K. Mah, Maria Jeziorska, Andrew Marshall, Roni M. Shtein, Rodica Pop‐Busui, Stephen I. Lentz, Andrew J.M. Boulton, Mitra Tavakoli, Nathan Efron, Rayaz A. Malik

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetologia · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Health and Medical Research CouncilSanofi GenzymeNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeEuropean Association for the Study of DiabetesNovo NordiskUniversity of TorontoInsulet CorporationSanofiPTC TherapeuticsCanadian Society of Endocrinology and MetabolismCanadian Diabetes AssociationBiogenEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbPfizerCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAmerican Diabetes AssociationDiabetes CanadaNational Institutes of HealthU.S. Department of Health and Human Services
KeywordsMedicineType 2 diabetesCohortDiabetes mellitusType 1 diabetesPolyneuropathyInternal medicineOphthalmologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Small cohort studies raise the hypothesis that corneal nerve abnormalities (including corneal nerve fibre length [CNFL]) are valid non-invasive imaging endpoints for diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy (DSP). We aimed to establish concurrent validity and diagnostic thresholds in a large cohort of participants with and without DSP. Nine hundred and ninety-eight participants from five centres (516 with type 1 diabetes and 482 with type 2 diabetes) underwent CNFL quantification and clinical and electrophysiological examination. AUC and diagnostic thresholds were derived and validated in randomly selected samples using receiver operating characteristic analysis. Sensitivity analyses included latent class models to address the issue of imperfect reference standard. Type 1 and type 2 diabetes subcohorts had mean age of 42 ± 19 and 62 ± 10 years, diabetes duration 21 ± 15 and 12 ± 9 years and DSP prevalence of 31% and 53%, respectively. Derivation AUC for CNFL was 0.77 in type 1 diabetes ( p < 0.001) and 0.68 in type 2 diabetes ( p < 0.001) and was approximately reproduced in validation sets. The optimal threshold for automated CNFL was 12.5 mm/mm 2 in type 1 diabetes and 12.3 mm/mm 2 in type 2 diabetes. In the total cohort, a lower threshold value below 8.6 mm/mm 2 to rule in DSP and an upper value of 15.3 mm/mm 2 to rule out DSP were associated with 88% specificity and 88% sensitivity. We established the diagnostic validity and common diagnostic thresholds for CNFL in type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Further research must determine to what extent CNFL can be deployed in clinical practice and in clinical trials assessing the efficacy of disease-modifying therapies for DSP.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations154
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetologiaSame topicOcular Surface and Contact LensFrench-language works237,207