MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414042289 · doi:10.1111/jns.70058

Polyneuropathy in Kidney Transplant Recipients: Accuracy of a New Clinical Diagnostic Scoring System

2025· article· en· W4414042289 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Svea Nolte, Naser B.N. Shehab, Stefan P. Berger, Celina Oldag, Ilja M. Nolte, Bianca T. A. de Greef, Fiete Lange, Marco van Londen, Catharina G. Faber, Stephan J. L. Bakker, Pieter A. van Doorn, Harmen R. Moes, Gea Drost

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Peripheral Nervous System · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitair Medisch Centrum GroningenViiV Healthcare
KeywordsScoring systemPolyneuropathyKidney transplantKidneyDiagnostic accuracy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background and Aims Polyneuropathy is highly prevalent among kidney transplant recipients (KTR), underscoring the need for an accurate yet easy‐to‐perform diagnostic method to improve understanding and enable early identification of treatable cases. Methods This study included KTR at least 12 months post‐transplant at the University Medical Centre Groningen, the Netherlands. An expert panel assessed polyneuropathy through a structured neurological examination, quantitative sensory testing, and nerve conduction studies. The modified Toronto Clinical Neuropathy Score (mTCNS) was obtained from all participants. Logistic regression analyses with Firth penalization validated the mTCNS components. A new model, the Kidney Transplant Neuropathy Score (KTNS), was developed through stepwise elimination. Diagnostic performance was evaluated with bootstrapped metrics and ROC curve analyses. Results Among 160 KTR, 91 (57%) were diagnosed with polyneuropathy. All 10 mTCNS components were univariably associated with polyneuropathy; numbness (OR = 4.9 [1.8–18.0]), tingling (OR = 2.5 [1.2–5.9]), impaired nociception (OR = 1.5 [1.1–2.2]), and reduced vibration perception (OR = 1.5 [1.0–2.4]) remained independently associated in multivariable analysis. The mTCNS achieved an area under the curve (AUC) in ROC analysis of 0.83 [0.76–0.89]. Two KTNS were derived: the KTNSBasic, including history of numbness, tingling in the feet, and pinprick and vibration perception testing (AUC–ROC: 0.85 [0.79–0.90]); and the KTNSAdvanced, replacing vibration perception with Achilles and patellar deep tendon reflex testing (AUC–ROC: 0.90 [0.85–0.94]). Interpretation The mTCNS is a valid diagnostic tool for polyneuropathy in KTR. The KTNS offers a simplified alternative based on key symptoms and sensory tests, with reflex testing included in the KTNSAdvanced for settings with neurological expertise. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04664426

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)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Peripheral Nervous SystemSame topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207