↓ Skip to main content

Classification of the severity of diabetic neuropathy: a new approach taking uncertainties into account using fuzzy logic

Overview of attention for article published in Clinics, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
121 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Classification of the severity of diabetic neuropathy: a new approach taking uncertainties into account using fuzzy logic
Published in
Clinics, February 2012
DOI 10.6061/clinics/2012(02)10
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andreja P Picon, Neli R S Ortega, Ricky Watari, Cristina Sartor, Isabel C N Sacco

Abstract

This study proposes a new approach that considers uncertainty in predicting and quantifying the presence and severity of diabetic peripheral neuropathy. A rule-based fuzzy expert system was designed by four experts in diabetic neuropathy. The model variables were used to classify neuropathy in diabetic patients, defining it as mild, moderate, or severe. System performance was evaluated by means of the Kappa agreement measure, comparing the results of the model with those generated by the experts in an assessment of 50 patients. Accuracy was evaluated by an ROC curve analysis obtained based on 50 other cases; the results of those clinical assessments were considered to be the gold standard. According to the Kappa analysis, the model was in moderate agreement with expert opinions. The ROC analysis (evaluation of accuracy) determined an area under the curve equal to 0.91, demonstrating very good consistency in classifying patients with diabetic neuropathy. The model efficiently classified diabetic patients with different degrees of neuropathy severity. In addition, the model provides a way to quantify diabetic neuropathy severity and allows a more accurate patient condition assessment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 121 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Unknown 120 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 11%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Researcher 7 6%
Other 26 21%
Unknown 37 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 32%
Engineering 10 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Computer Science 4 3%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 41 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 June 2017.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinics
#860
of 1,215 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,112
of 253,528 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinics
#40
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,215 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 253,528 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.