MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408393631 · doi:10.1186/s12902-025-01897-1

Polymorphic variants and risk of diabetic peripheral neuropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4408393631 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniella Vinelli-Arzubiaga, María Cristina Laso-Salazar, Hugo Hernán Abarca-Barriga

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Endocrine Disorders · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisDiabetes mellitusPeripheral neuropathyType 2 diabetesInternal medicineType 2 Diabetes MellitusMEDLINEBioinformaticsEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Neuropathy is a frequent complication of diabetes mellitus, a disease that is growing exponentially worldwide. Genetic research has emerged as an important tool for better understanding its predisposition, although a systematic synthesis of existing evidence is needed to better comprehend its association. The objective of this review was to determine the association between polymorphic variants identified through massive genomic testing and the risk of peripheral diabetic neuropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: Inclusion criteria were case-control, cohort, and cross-sectional studies examining polymorphic variants and diabetic neuropathy (DNP) risk in type 2 diabetes, studies using GWAS, EWAS, or microarray for identifying genetic polymorphisms, studies involving adults, and articles in English or Spanish. Exclusion criteria included case reports, case series, ecological studies, editor letters, reviews, or secondary studies and conference abstracts. Exhaustive search in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases, using keywords. Risk of bias was determined through Newcastle-Ottawa scale. A qualitative synthesis of the results was performed (frequency), including meta-analysis where applicable (forest plot and funnel plot). RESULTS: The searching strategy identified 370 studies, from which 7 were chosen for the systematic review, included 9478 participants. The quality of the studies was mostly good, but a significant heterogeneity in methods was found. We identify a significant association between peripheral neuropathy and plenty of single nucleotide variants (SNVs). Just the SNV rs10555080 in the gene THEG5 showed a higher likelihood of neuropathy (OR:1,34; IC 95%: 1,19 - 1,49). DISCUSSION: This study faced limitations due to heterogeneity in DNP definitions, genotyping methods, and a focus on white and Arab populations, limiting generalization. Only English and Spanish articles were included, potentially excluding relevant research in other languages. Multiple SNVs were identified through genomic testing that were associated with peripheral diabetic neuropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus; however, the SNVs were not similar between studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This research received no funding and was registered in PROSPERO (ID CRD42024505256).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.024
Bibliometrics0.0060.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Endocrine DisordersSame topicPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207