The DOI matches its Crossref record.
CLINICAL AND NEUROPATHOLOGICAL CRITERIA FOR THE DIAGNOSIS AND STAGING OF DIABETIC POLYNEUROPATHY
Abstract
Scored symptoms, neurological deficits, detection threshold of cutaneous sensation and parameters of nerve conduction were compared with quantitated neuropathological abnormalities in the sural nerve in 47 healthy subjects and 36 diabetic patients, 32 with and 4 without neuropathy. The fifth percentile line of a new Index of Pathology, which combines loss of myelinated fibres and abnormality of the remaining fibres, was found to provide a sensitive and reliable minimum neuropathological criterion for the diagnosis of polyneuropathy. Abnormality, as assessed by two clinical evaluations, similarly separated healthy subjects and diabetic patients into those with and without neuropathy. For the detection of diabetic polyneuropathy, vibration sense was more sensitive than touch-pressure or thermal cooling. Abnormalities of nerve conduction were found to be both sensitive and reliable in the detection of polyneuropathy. Velocity was most frequently abnormal, but only slightly more often than F wave latency and amplitude. We conclude that abnormality, as judged independently from two different types of evaluation, provides a sensitive and reliable minimal criterion for the diagnosis of neuropathy. Although symptoms, neurological deficits and abnormalities of nerve conduction are statistically associated, they should be evaluated separately to provide adequate characterization.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Young, M. J., Boulton, A. J. M., Macleod, A. F., Williams, D. R. R., & Sonksen, P. H. (1993) · Diabetologia · doi:10.1007/bf00400697 · Cited by 1,502
England, J. D., Gronseth, G. S., Franklin, G., Miller, R. G., Asbury, A. K., Carter, G. T., Cohen, J. A., Fisher, M. A., Howard, J. F., Kinsella, L. J., et al. (2005) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000149522.32823.ea · Cited by 742
Detection, characterization, and staging of polyneuropathy: Assessed in diabetics
Dyck, P. J. (1988) · Muscle & Nerve · doi:10.1002/mus.880110106 · Cited by 555
Self-citationA Comparison of Two Diabetic Foot Ulcer Classification Systems
Oyibo, S. O., Jude, E. B., Tarawneh, I., Nguyen, H. C., Harkless, L. B., & Boulton, A. J. M. (2001) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/diacare.24.1.84 · Cited by 468
Olaleye, D., Perkins, B. A., & Bril, V. (2001) · Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice · doi:10.1016/s0168-8227(01)00278-9 · Cited by 158
Metadata
- Authors
- DYCK, P. J., KARNES, J. L., DAUBE, J., O'BRIEN, P., & SERVICE, F. J.
- Venue
- Brain
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1985
- Volume
- 108
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 861-880
- ISSN
- 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2156
- OpenAlex
- W2097051008
- Cited by
- 326
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: CLINICAL AND NEUROPATHOLOGICAL CRITERIA FOR THE DIAGNOSIS AND STAGING OF DIABETIC POLYNEUROPATHY. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/brain/108.4.861
- The paper
- DYCK, P. J., KARNES, J. L., DAUBE, J., O'BRIEN, P., & SERVICE, F. J. (1985). CLINICAL AND NEUROPATHOLOGICAL CRITERIA FOR THE DIAGNOSIS AND STAGING OF DIABETIC POLYNEUROPATHY. Brain. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/108.4.861
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.