MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381337843 · doi:10.2337/db23-489-p

489-P: Abnormal Combined Point-of-Care-Device DPN-Check and SUDOSCAN Results Predict All-Cause Mortality in People with Diabetes

2023· article· en· W4381337843 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mohummad Shaan Goonoo, Dinesh Selvarajah, GORDON P. SLOAN, Solomon Tesfaye

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological and metabolic disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsMedicineDiabetes mellitusInternal medicinePeripheral neuropathyProportional hazards modelType 2 diabetesSurgeryEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims: Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) has been associated with increased mortality; however, data is not available for objectively diagnosed DPN using point-of-care-devices (POCDs). We therefore examined the predictive validity of POCD-diagnosed DPN for increased mortality in a prospective study. Methods: A total of 245 consecutive people with diabetes (17 type 1 diabetes, age 62.3+14.3) attending retinal-screening had all annual review health checks in a One-stop Screening Service. DPN assessments included Toronto Clinical Neuropathy Score (TCNS) evaluation, 10g-monofilament test(10g-MFT) and two validated, objective POCDs, DPN-Check (handheld device measuring sural nerve conduction velocity/amplitude), and SUDOSCAN (measuring sudomotor function). Mortality data was collected at 7-year follow-up. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox-proportional hazards models were generated to assess associations of DPN measures with all-cause mortality. Results: At follow-up, 52 [21.2% (SE 6.8%)] had died. Those who died were older at screening [72.4 (10.9) vs 59.6 (13.9) years; (p<0.001)]. The prevalence of screen-detected DPN was 12.6% (SE 4.4%) for 10g-MFT, 27.7% (SE 8.2%) for TCNS and 33.4% (SE 9.1%) for combined POCDs. In crude Kaplan-Meier analyses all-cause mortality risk was greater in patients with abnormal TCNS (p<0.001) and POCDs (p<0.001) but was equivalent in patients with normal or abnormal 10g-MFT (p=0.21). After adjusting for age, HbA1c and Total Cholesterol, only abnormal POCDs was significantly associated with all-cause mortality [HR 1.18 (p=0.04, 95%CI 1.00:1.39) vs TCNS [HR 1.33 (p=0.06, 95%CI 0.99:1.78)]. Conclusions: This is the first prospective study showing abnormal combined DPN-Check and SUDOSCAN results predict all-cause mortality after adjusting for other risk factors. However, 10g-MFT and TCNS that diagnose DPN late did not predict all-cause mortality. Disclosure M.Goonoo: None. D.Selvarajah: None. G.P.Sloan: None. S.Tesfaye: Advisory Panel; Bayer Inc., Wörwag Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, Angelini, Speaker's Bureau; Viatris Inc., Nevro Corp., Procter & Gamble, Novo Nordisk, Berlin-Chemie AG.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.695

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetesSame topicNeurological and metabolic disordersFrench-language works237,207