Cardiac Autonomic Neuropathy in Diabetes Mellitus
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (CAN) is a severely debilitating yet underdiagnosed condition in patients with diabetes. The prevalence can range from 2.5% (based on the primary prevention cohort in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial) to as high as 90% of patients with type 1 diabetes. Clinical manifestations range from orthostasis to myocardial infarction. The diagnosis is made using multiple autonomic function tests to assess both sympathetic and parasympathetic function. The pathophysiology of CAN is complex, likely multifactorial, and not completely understood. Treatment is limited to symptomatic control of orthostatic hypotension, which is a late complication, and current strategies to reverse CAN are limited. This review explores the epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and complications of CAN as well as current treatment options. <strong>Keywords:</strong> EDIC study, perioperative mortality, exercise intolerance, EURODIAB study, glycosylation, reactive oxygen species, microvascular complications, diabetic neuropathy, Toronto Consensus Panel
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 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 | 0.016 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 it