Development and Comparative Efficacy of Lagos Neuropathy Protocol for Improving Recovery of Symptom and Functional Independence Performance in Individuals with Diabetic Peripheral Sensorimotor Polyneuropathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Diabetic peripheral sensorimotor polyneuropathy (DPSP) has been treated with sketchy outcomes and available approaches are not applicable for self-administration. This study developed protocol for managing symptoms of DPSP and assessed its comparative efficacy. Methods: Study developed Lagos Neuropathy Protocol (LNP) through existing concept in DPSP and tested its safety, clinical applicability, and ease of self-administration. Its efficacy was compared with Buerger-Allen Exercise (BAE) by involving 31 (11males) with DPSP, randomized into LNP and BAE and treated for 10-week. Toronto Clinical Scoring System was used to diagnose DPSP while Diabetic Neuropathy Examination was used to diagnose distal polyneuropathy. Sensory/pressure perception was assessed using 10 g-monofilament while Short Physical Performance Battery, Bergs Balance Scale and Visual Analogue Scale was used to assess functional performance, strength and balance, and pain respectively. Results: LNP has three domains: sensory/pressure/proprioception, strength/balance, and pain/swelling. Most (80%) of the participants rated the LNP as excellently safe while the rest (20%) rated as very good in safety. All the participants rated LNP excellent in terms of self-administration and suitability for clinical use without adverse effect. The mean age of the participants for the comparative phase was 66.20±9.48years while their length of diagnoses of diabetes was 15.80±13.35years. About a third (32.5%) had DPSP. Both LNP and BAE had significant improvement (p<0.05) in sensory/pressure perception, pain, strength and balance, and functional performance but LNP had better significant improvement. Conclusion: LNP is safe, good for self-administration, clinically applicable and efficacious in improving sensory/pressure perception, balance, pain and functional performances in individuals with DPSP.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".