MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177421278 · doi:10.2337/db21-209-or

209-OR: Physical Activity and Nerve Structure and Function in Patients with Long-Standing Type 1 Diabetes

2021· article· en· W3177421278 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Evan J.H. Lewis, Leif Erik Lovblom, Sebastien O. Lanctôt, Daniel Scarr, Nancy Cardinez, Alanna Weisman, Michael H. Brent, Vera Bril, David Z.I. Cherney, Bruce A. Perkins

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiochemical effects in animals
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePrediabetesDiabetes mellitusGlycemicNerve conduction velocityInternal medicinePopulationCardiologyType 2 diabetesNerve fiberCommon peroneal nervePeripheral neuropathyOphthalmologyEndocrinologySurgeryAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Physical activity (PA) is recommended for patients with diabetes to improve glycemic control. In prediabetes and T2D there is a causal relationship between PA and peripheral nerve health; however, the effect of PA on nerve structure and function in longstanding T1D is unclear. We aimed to determine the relationship between PA and small nerve fiber morphology, large nerve fiber function and cardiac autonomic function in this population. Data from 75 participants was collected as part of the Canadian Study of Longevity in T1D. Participants completed a physical exam, medical history and neuropathy assessment including nerve conduction studies (NCS), corneal confocal microscopy measurement of corneal nerve fiber length (CNFL) and assessment of heart rate variability. Participants also reported their daily PA from the preceding 12-months. There were 41(55%) female participants, mean ± SD age was 66 ± 8 years, median duration of diabetes was 54 [52,58] years, BMI was 26.6 ± 3.8, HbA1c of 7.3 ± 0.8. 65(89%) participants met the criteria for diagnosis of diabetic neuropathy. The weekly mean PA time was 156 ± 132 min and 35(47%) reported ≧150 minutes/week. PA time was associated with a greater cooling detection threshold (r=0.24; p=0.043), higher peroneal and sural amplitude (r=0.36; p=0.0017, rs=0.26; p=0.024) and conduction velocity (rs=0.28; p=0.015, r=0.23; p=0.050). Vibration perception threshold at the toe was inversely associated with PA (r=-0.31; p=0.025), whereas there was no association at the finger. There was no association between PA time and heart rate variability (r=-0.040; p=0.74) or CNFL (r=0.23; p=0.055). Linear regression for NCS, adjusting for age and A1c, showed that for each 30 min of PA there was an 0.09 mv higher peroneal amplitude (p=0.032) and 0.048 ms lower peroneal F-wave latency (p=0.022). In individuals with longstanding T1D, PA is associated with substantially better large nerve fiber function in the lower limbs and some better measures of small nerve fiber function. Disclosure E. J. H. Lewis: Board Member; Self; Nutarniq Corp, Board Member; Spouse/Partner; Nutarniq Corp, Research Support; Self; Canadian Institutes of Health Research. B. A. Perkins: Advisory Panel; Self; Abbott Diabetes, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Insulet Corporation, Novo Nordisk Canada Inc., Other Relationship; Self; Abbott Diabetes, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk Canada Inc. L. Lovblom: None. S. O. Lanctot: None. D. Scarr: None. N. Cardinez: None. A. Weisman: None. M. H. Brent: Advisory Panel; Self; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Canada Inc., Roche Canada, Research Support; Self; Bayer AG, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Canada Inc. V. Bril: Advisory Panel; Self; Akcea Therapeutics, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc., CSL Behring, Sanofi Genzyme, Consultant; Self; Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Research Support; Self; Takeda Canada. D. Cherney: Other Relationship; Self; AbbVie Inc., AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC., Lilly Diabetes, Merck & Co., Inc., Mitsubishi-Tanabe, Maze Inc, Prometic, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi. Funding JDRF (17-2013-312)

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 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)0.000
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 score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetesSame topicBiochemical effects in animalsFrench-language works237,207