Assessment of small fiber neuropathy and distal sensory neuropathy in female patients with fibromyalgia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: We investigated sudomotor dysfunction, small fiber neuropathy (SFN), and their clinical significance in female fibromyalgia patients. METHODS: Fibromyalgia patients and healthy controls (HCs) were recruited. Clinical and laboratory data were measured. Electrochemical skin conductance (ESC) values of hands and feet were assessed by SUDOSCAN. Additionally, several other methods were employed, including nerve conduction study (NCS), electromyography (EMG), and questionnaires. Spearman correlation coefficient was calculated to identify factors associated with ESC values of SUDOSCAN. RESULTS: Twenty-two female fibromyalgia patients and 22 female HCs were recruited. The fibromyalgia group had lower EQ5D and higher Toronto Clinical Neuropathy scores than the HC group. Most of the EMG/NCS findings of motor and proximal sensory nerves were comparable between the fibromyalgia and HC groups, whereas sensory nerve action potential amplitudes of distal sensory nerves were significantly lower in the fibromyalgia group. Mean ESC values of hands and feet were significantly lower in the fibromyalgia group than in the HC group (57.6 ± 16.2 vs. 68.8 ± 10.3 μS, p = 0.010 for hands, 64.9 ± 11.5 vs. 72.0 ± 8.2 μS, p = 0.025 for feet, respectively). Moderate to severe SFN was more common in the fibromyalgia group (68.2%) than in the HC group (68.2 vs. 50%, p = 0.019). Fibromyalgia disease duration was significantly correlated with the ESC values of hands/feet, and tricyclic antidepressant (TCA) responders had higher ESC values than non-responders. CONCLUSION: SFN was commonly detected in fibromyalgia patients who had normal EMG/NCS findings and was more severe in fibromyalgia patients with longer disease duration. SUDOSCAN may predict response to TCA therapy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".