MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4303981168 · doi:10.3390/s22197571

SUDOSCAN, an Innovative, Simple and Non-Invasive Medical Device for Assessing Sudomotor Function

2022· article· en· W4303981168 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dana Elena Gavan, Alexandru Gâvan, Cosmina Ioana Bondor, Bogdan Florea, Frank L. Bowling, Georgeta Inceu, Liora Colobățiu

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSudomotorMedicineGlycated hemoglobinPeripheral neuropathyDiabetes mellitusInternal medicineDiabetic neuropathySkin conductanceCardiologyPhysical therapyType 2 diabetesEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diabetic autonomic neuropathy is probably the most undiagnosed but serious complication of diabetes. The main objectives were to assess the prevalence of peripheral and autonomic neuropathy in a population of diabetic patients, analyze it in a real-life outpatient unit scenario and determine the feasibility of performing SUDOSCAN tests together with widely used tests for neuropathy. A total of 33 patients were included in the study. Different scoring systems (the Toronto Clinical Neuropathy Score-TCNS; the Neuropathy Disability Score-NDS; and the Neuropathy Symptom Score-NSS) were applied to record diabetic neuropathy (DN), while the SUDOSCAN medical device was used to assess sudomotor function, detect diabetic autonomic neuropathy and screen for cardiac autonomic neuropathy (CAN). Fifteen (45.5%) patients had sudomotor dysfunction. The SUDOSCAN CAN risk score was positively correlated with the hands' electrochemical sweat conductance (ESC), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), the level of the glycated hemoglobin, as well as with the TCNS, NDS and NSS. Performing SUDOSCAN tests together with other tests for DN proved to be a feasible approach that could be used in daily clinical practice in order to screen for DN, as well as for the early screening of CAN, before more complex and time-consuming tests.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.578
Threshold uncertainty score0.500

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207