Prognostic Implications of Early Albuminocytological Dissociation in Guillain–Barré Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Background: Half of Guillain–Barré syndrome (GBS) present elevated cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) protein levels within 1 week since symptom onset and 80% within 2 weeks. Our objective was to determine the clinical and prognostic implication of albuminocytological dissociation in early GBS. Methods: An ambispective cohort study was conducted. Good outcome was considered if the patient was able to walk unaided (Guillain-Barré disability score [GDS] ≤ 2 points) at 3-month follow-up. Patients were classified into two groups: with and without albuminocytological dissociation; we compared clinical and paraclinic characteristics between the groups. We analyzed clinical and electrophysiological factors related to presenting early dissociation through a multivariate model. Results: We included 240 patients who fulfilled Asbury criteria for GBS. On further selection, only 94 patients fulfilled inclusion. Mean age was 45.94 ± 17.1 years and 67% were male. Median time from symptom onset to admission was 5 days (IQR 3–6). Regarding albuminocytological dissociation and electrophysiological variants, we found a significant difference: acute inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (AIDP) [60.6% vs 26.2%, p = 0.002], acute motor axonal neuropathy (AMAN) [21.2% vs 49.1%, p = 0.009] and acute motor sensory axonal neuropathy (AMSAN) [12.1% vs 1.6%, p = 0.05]. We did not observe significant differences in recovery of independent walking in short term between both groups. The presence of conduction block in any variant (OR 3.21, 95% CI 1.12–9.16, p = 0.02) and absence of sural registration (OR 5.69, 95% CI 1.48–21.83, p = 0.011) were independent factors related to early dissociation. Conclusions: Early dissociation (<7 days) is not associated with any particular clinical feature or unfavorable outcome. It is more common to see in AIDP rather than axonal variants.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".