BVA decisions by condition
Peripheral neuropathy: BVA grant rates and what wins
From 2017 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided a peripheral neuropathy issue in 674 decisions. It granted the peripheral neuropathy issue in 19.6% of them, close to the 19.4% grant rate for all conditions, denied it in 36.6%, and remanded it in 43.2%. Counting only decisions on the merits (granted or denied), 34.8% were granted.
Decisions
674
2017–2026
Granted
19.6%
All conditions: 19.4%
Granted on the merits
34.8%
Granted ÷ (granted + denied)
Remanded
43.2%
Denied: 36.6%
Peripheral neuropathy outcomes by year
| Year | Issues decided | Granted | Denied | Remanded | Other |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 64 | 10.9% | 39.1% | 46.9% | 3.1% |
| 2018 | 105 | 14.3% | 31.4% | 51.4% | 2.9% |
| 2019 | 123 | 13.8% | 36.6% | 44.7% | 4.9% |
| 2020 | 156 | 15.4% | 40.4% | 42.3% | 1.9% |
| 2021 | 110 | 24.5% | 43.6% | 30.9% | 0.9% |
| 2022 | 103 | 23.3% | 37.9% | 37.9% | 1.0% |
| 2023 | 106 | 25.5% | 34.0% | 38.7% | 1.9% |
| 2024 | 103 | 32.0% | 15.5% | 42.7% | 9.7% |
| 2025 | 82 | 26.8% | 46.3% | 26.8% | 0.0% |
Each row counts issues (each condition the Board decided), so the shares add up to 100%. Other: dismissed, withdrawn or no clear outcome. Years with fewer than 50 issues are left out.
Evidence in granted and denied peripheral neuropathy decisions
For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the peripheral neuropathy issue on the merits when the decision mentioned it, compared with decisions that did not. These are associations, not causes, and evidence is recorded per decision, not per issue.
| In the record | Decisions | Granted when present | When absent | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive nexus opinion | 149 | 72.6% | 22.2% | +50.4 pts |
| Favorable VA exam | 115 | 60.8% | 28.0% | +32.8 pts |
| Treating physician opinion | 46 | 59.3% | 33.0% | +26.3 pts |
| Claimed as secondary | 286 | 44.3% | 27.4% | +17.0 pts |
| Private medical opinion | 275 | 42.6% | 28.6% | +14.0 pts |
| Combat service | 75 | 39.0% | 34.3% | +4.7 pts |
| Lay statement | 577 | 30.7% | 63.8% | −33.1 pts |
- The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 71.2% of the decisions that granted peripheral neuropathy.
- The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 28.8% of grants and 14.6% of denials.
Negative evidence in the record
An unfavorable exam or a negative nexus opinion often sits in the same record as favorable evidence, and the Board weighs them against each other. So these rows show how often peripheral neuropathy was still granted when the record contained the negative item, not that the item helped.
| In the record | Decisions | Granted when present | When absent | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfavorable VA exam | 524 | 30.8% | 50.0% | −19.2 pts |
| Negative nexus opinion | 398 | 25.5% | 49.3% | −23.8 pts |
Why the Board granted or denied peripheral neuropathy
Most common reasons in grants
- Current diagnosis established19
- Caused by the service-connected disability16
- Service connection established10
- Criteria for secondary service connection met2
- Peripheral neuropathy diagnosed2
- Aggravated by the service-connected disability2
- Presumed exposure to herbicide agents due to vietnam service2
- Conceded agent orange exposure2
Most common reasons in denials
- No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis33
- VA examiner: less likely than not related to service30
- Preponderance of the evidence against the claim29
- Service records negative or silent29
- No current diagnosis26
- Continuity of symptomatology since service7
- Current diagnosis established6
- Caused by the service-connected disability4
Numbers are decisions that gave the reason. Reasons are short phrases extracted by AI from each decision; common wordings of the same reason are grouped. Benefit of the doubt is reported above.
Recent peripheral neuropathy decisions
Granted
Evidence in relative equipoise; Reasonable doubt resolved in Veteran's favor; Private opinion linked to dental duties
Favorable opinion from VA APRN; Competent and credible lay evidence of in-service onset; Approximate balance of evidence; Benefit of the doubt applied
Credible evidence of right lower extremity impairment during and since service; Resolving all reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor; Onset of condition coincident with active-duty service
Denied
Service treatment records negative for neurologic complaints.; No indication of nexus to service.; VA examination not required due to insufficient credible evidence.
Service treatment records negative for complaints or findings.; Veteran's reported onset decades after service.; VA examiner opined less likely than not caused by TERA.; Diabetes mellitus type 2 identified as likely cause of neuropathy.; No objective evidence linking neuropathy to in-service exposure.
Service treatment records did not reflect complaints or treatment for neuropathy.; VA examinations found no link between Camp Lejeune contaminants and peripheral neuropathy.; VA examinations noted other potential causes for neuropathy, such as low B12 and elevated A1C.; VA examinations found no link between neuropathy and service-connected psychiatric or skin disabilities.; Private physician opinion was too general and speculative.; Veteran's testimony regarding cause was not competent medical evidence.
Rules that apply to peripheral neuropathy claims
- 38 CFR 3.303
Principles of service connection
Read it in VA Law Explorer - 38 CFR 3.310
Secondary service connection and aggravation
Read it in VA Law Explorer - 38 CFR 3.102
Reasonable doubt (benefit of the doubt)
Read it in VA Law Explorer
Research your peripheral neuropathy case
Narrow by year, judge, evidence or secondary condition, read the decisions, and export a research memo.
How these numbers are calculated
- Rates count decisions in which the Board decided a peripheral neuropathy issue, by the outcome of that issue. Other issues in the same decision can have different outcomes.
- “Granted on the merits” leaves out remands and dismissals. “All conditions” is the grant share across every condition issue in the data.
- The data comes from CaseScribe's AI extraction of public BVA decisions (2017–2026) and can contain errors. It is updated automatically as new decisions are added.