ArticlePloS one2018
Validity of a point-of-care nerve conduction device for polyneuropathy identification in older adults with diabetes: Results from the Canadian Study of Longevity in Type 1 Diabetes.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Acupuncture in diabetic peripheral neuropathy-neurological outcomes of the randomized acupuncture in diabetic peripheral neuropathy trial.World journal of diabetes · 2023Trial
- Idiopathic Distal Sensory Polyneuropathy and Fibromyalgia Syndrome: A Comparative Phenotyping Study.Pain and therapy · 2024Article
- Reliability of a novel point of care device for monitoring diabetic peripheral neuropathy.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Renal hemodynamic dysfunction and neuropathy in longstanding type 1 diabetes: Results from the Canadian study of longevity in type 1 diabetes.Journal of diabetes and its complications · 2022Article
- Point-of-care sural nerve conduction could predict the presence of cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy in type 1 diabetes mellitus.Journal of diabetes investigation · 2022Article
- Diabetes Distal Peripheral Neuropathy: Subtypes and Diagnostic and Screening Technologies.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2022Review
- Point-of-care nerve conduction device predicts the severity of diabetic polyneuropathy: A quantitative, but easy-to-use, prediction model.Journal of diabetes investigation · 2021Article
- Acupuncture in diabetic peripheral neuropathy-protocol for the randomized, multicenter ACUDPN trial.Trials · 2021Article
- Early Detection of Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: A Focus on Small Nerve Fibres.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Clinical polyneuropathy does not increase with prediabetes or metabolic syndrome in the Japanese general population.Journal of diabetes investigation · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePoint-of-care nerve conduction devices (POCD) have been studied in younger patients and may facilitate screening for polyneuropathy in non-specialized clinical settings. However, performance may be impaired with advanced age owing to age-related changes in nerve conduction. We aimed to evaluate the validity of a POCD as a proxy for standard nerve conduction studies (NCS) in older adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D).
methodsSural nerve amplitude potential (AMP) and sural nerve conduction velocity (CV) was measured in 68 participants with ≥ 50 years T1D duration and 71 controls (from age/sex-matched subgroups) using POCD and NCS protocols. Agreement was determined by the Bland-Altman method, and validity was determined by receiver operating characteristic curves.
resultsT1D were 53% female, aged 66±8yr and had diabetes duration 54yr[52,58]. Controls were 56%(p = 0.69) female and aged 65±8yr(p = 0.36). Mean AMPPOCD and CVPOCD for the 139 participants was 7.4±5.8μV and 45.7±11.2m/s and mean AMPNCS and CVNCS was 7.2±6.1μV and 43.3±8.3m/s. Mean difference of AMPPOCD-AMPNCS was 0.3±3.8μV and was 2.3±8.5m/s for CVPOCD-CVNCS. A AMPPOCD of ≤6μV had 80% sensitivity and 80% specificity for identifying abnormal AMPNCS, while a CVPOCD of ≤44m/s had 81% sensitivity and 82% specificity to identify abnormal CVNCS. Abnormality in AMPPOCD or CVPOCD was associated with 87% sensitivity, while abnormality in both measures was associated with 97% specificity for polyneuropathy identification.
conclusionsThe POCD has strong agreement and diagnostic accuracy for identification of polyneuropathy in a high-risk subgroup and thus may represent a sufficiently accurate and rapid test for routinely detecting those with electrophysiological dysfunction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.