ArticleFrontiers in neurology2022
Temporal Dispersion and Duration of the Distal Compound Muscle Action Potential Do Not Distinguish Diabetic Sensorimotor Polyneuropathy From Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unexpected Conduction Blocks inClinical case reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the contribution of duration and temporal dispersion (TD) of the distal compound muscle action potential (CMAP) in discriminating chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) from diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy (DSP) and from CIDP+DSP. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients diagnosed with CIDP, DSP and CIDP+DSP (responsive to immunotherapy) and examined differences in CMAP duration and TD at baseline. Results: We included 59 subjects: 17 CIDP, 21 DSP and 21 CIDP+DSP. Of these, 16 (94.1%) CIDP, 18 (85.7%) CIDP+DSP and 1 (4.7%) DSP fulfilled the 2010 EFNS/PNS criteria for definite CIDP. There was no difference in CMAP duration or TD in all nerves (compound outcome) or in individual motor nerves. Patients with CIDP/CIDP+DSP had more conduction blocks, slower conduction velocities and more prolonged F wave latencies than those with DSP. Conclusion: Measures of CMAP duration and TD were not helpful in distinguishing CIDP, DSP or CIDP+DSP patients; however, parameters such as F-wave latencies, conduction blocks or the number of demyelinating parameters were useful in this separation. Significance: There are no definite nerve conduction criteria to distinguish patients with CIDP+DSP from DSP alone. Further studies focusing on measures of demyelination may provide stronger evidence to guide treatment decisions in CIDP + DSP patients.
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.