MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2811343787 · doi:10.1155/2018/8516276

In Vivo Corneal Confocal Microscopy Detects Improvement of Corneal Nerve Parameters following Glycemic Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

2018· article· en· W2811343787 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Diabetes Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlycemicConfocal microscopyIn vivoOphthalmologyMedicineType 2 diabetesConfocalDiabetes mellitusCorneaEndocrinologyBiologyOpticsCell biologyBiotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aim. This study aimed to investigate whether in vivo corneal confocal microscopy (CCM) can detect the improvement of corneal nerve parameters following glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes in natural history. Methods . Thirty-two patients with diabetes complicated by DPN and 12 age-matched control subjects underwent detailed clinical examination and were assessed per the Toronto Clinical Scoring Scale for DPN, nerve conduction studies, and IVCCM at baseline and after approximately one year from the first visit. Results. At follow-up, 16 diabetic patients had improved glycemic control (group A, HbA1c &lt; 7.0%, 7.78 ± 1.62% versus 6.52 ± 0.59%, <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.005</mml:mn></mml:math>), while the remainder continued to have elevated HbA1c levels (group B, HbA1c ≥ 7.0%, 8.55 ± 1.57% versus 8.79 ± 1.05%, <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M2"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.527</mml:mn></mml:math>). For patients in group A, corneal nerve fiber density (CNFD) (18.55 ± 5.25 n/mm 2 versus 21.78 ± 6.13 n/mm 2 , <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M3"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.005</mml:mn></mml:math>) and corneal nerve fiber length (CNFL) (11.62 ± 2.89 mm/mm 2 versus 13.04 ± 2.44 mm/mm 2 , <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M4"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.029</mml:mn></mml:math>) increased significantly compared to baseline. For patients in group B, sural sensory nerve conduction velocity (47.93 ± 7.20 m/s versus 44.67 ± 6.43 m/s, <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M5"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.024</mml:mn></mml:math>), CNFD (17.19 ± 5.31 n/mm 2 versus 15.67 ± 4.16 n/mm 2 , <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M6"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.001</mml:mn></mml:math>), corneal nerve branch density (19.33 ± 12.82 n/mm 2 versus 14.23 ± 6.56 n/mm 2 , <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M7"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.033</mml:mn></mml:math>), and CNFL (11.16 ± 2.57 mm/mm 2 versus 9.90 ± 1.75 mm/mm 2 , <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M8"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.011</mml:mn></mml:math>) decreased significantly. Conclusions. The results of this study suggest that morphological repair of corneal nerve fibers can be detected when glycemic control improves. In vivo CCM could be a sensitive method that can be applied in future longitudinal or interventional studies on DPN.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score0.563

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.291 · 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