Association of serum adropin with risk and severity of diabetic peripheral neuropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is the major microvascular complication of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Adropin is a peptide hormone that has essential roles in metabolic homeostasis and the pathogenesis of T2DM and its complications. This study was designed to estimate serum adropin levels in patients with T2DM in correlation with risk factors of DPN. The authors also aimed to investigate the association between serum adropin level and clinical and electrophysiological tests of DPN. Patients and methods This case–control study enrolled 100 patients with T2DM (40 diabetic cases without DPN and 60 diabetic cases with DPN) and 50 controls. All participants were subjected to a complete neurological examination. The motor and sensory conduction velocities of the median nerve, ulnar nerve, and common peroneal nerve were measured. The severity of DPN was assessed by Toronto clinical scoring system (TCSS). Serum adropin levels were assessed using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Results Our results revealed decreased circulating serum adropin levels in patients with T2DM (3.5±1.2), especially diabetic patients with DPN (3.1±1.07), compared with controls (6.1±0.89). There is a negative correlation between serum adropin level and TCSS as well as electrophysiological tests: motor nerve conduction velocity of median and ulnar nerve, sensory nerve conduction velocity of median and ulnar nerve, compound muscle action potential amplitude (median and ulnar nerve), and sensory nerve action potential amplitude (median, ulnar, and perception threshold nerve) (P<0.001*). Conclusion Diabetic patients with DPN had lower values of serum adropin than diabetic patients without DPN, and serum adropin levels were negatively correlated with metabolic risk factors, TCSS, as well as electrophysiological tests of 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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".