Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 281

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Botulinum toxin for diabetic neuropathic pain: A randomized double-blind crossover trial

Yuan, R. Y., Sheu, J. J., Yu, J. M., Chen, W. T., Tseng, I. J., Chang, H. H., Hu, C. J.·2009·Neurology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Diabetic neuropathy is a common complication in diabetes, with patients typically experiencing diverse sensory symptoms including dysesthesias in the feet and usually accompanied by sleep disturbance. There is still no comprehensive understanding of the underlying biologic processes responsible for diabetic neuropathic pain. Thus, the current symptomatic therapy remains unsatisfactory. Recent experimental evidence suggests that botulinum toxin type A (BoNT/A) may not only inhibit the release of acetylcholine at the neuromuscular junctions, but also modulate afferent sensory fiber firing, thereby relieving neuropathic pain. METHODS: A double-blind crossover trial of intradermal BoNT/A for diabetic neuropathic pain in 18 patients was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness. RESULTS: We find significant reduction in visual analog scale (VAS) of pain by 0.83 +/- 1.11 at 1 week, 2.22 +/- 2.24 at 4 weeks, 2.33 +/- 2.56 at 8 weeks, and 2.53 +/- 2.48 at 12 weeks after injection in the BoNT/A group, as compared to the respective findings for a placebo group of 0.39 +/- 1.18, -0.11 +/- 2.04, 0.42 +/- 1.62, and 0.53 +/- 1.57 at the same timepoints (p < 0.05). Within the BoNT/A group, 44.4% of the participants experienced a reduction of VAS >/=3 within 3 months after injection, whereas there was no similar response in the placebo group. At the 4-week postinjection stage, improvement in sleep quality was measured using the Chinese version of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study found that botulinum toxin type A significantly reduced diabetic neuropathic pain and transiently improved sleep quality. Further large-scaled study is warranted.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1212/01.wnl.0000345968.05959.cf

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

See all 281

Metadata

Authors
Yuan, R. Y., Sheu, J. J., Yu, J. M., Chen, W. T., Tseng, I. J., Chang, H. H., & Hu, C. J.
Venue
Neurology
Published
2009-04-28
Volume
72
Issue
17
Pages
1473-1478
ISSN
  • 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-632X
OpenAlex
W2027315167
Cited by
281
References
2
FWCI
16.50
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: Botulinum toxin for diabetic neuropathic pain: A randomized double-blind crossover trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1212/01.wnl.0000345968.05959.cf
The paper
Yuan, R. Y., Sheu, J. J., Yu, J. M., Chen, W. T., Tseng, I. J., Chang, H. H., & Hu, C. J. (2009). Botulinum toxin for diabetic neuropathic pain: A randomized double-blind crossover trial. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000345968.05959.cf

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.