BVA decisions by condition
Polyneuritis specified otherwise as due to nutrition deficiency: BVA grant rates and what wins
From 2017 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided a polyneuritis specified otherwise as due to nutrition deficiency issue in 538 decisions. It granted the polyneuritis specified otherwise as due to nutrition deficiency issue in 12.3% of them, below the 19.4% grant rate for all conditions, denied it in 32.2%, and remanded it in 53.9%. Counting only decisions on the merits (granted or denied), 27.6% were granted.
Decisions
538
2017–2026
Granted
12.3%
All conditions: 19.4%
Granted on the merits
27.6%
Granted ÷ (granted + denied)
Remanded
53.9%
Denied: 32.2%
Polyneuritis specified otherwise as due to nutrition deficiency outcomes by year
| Year | Decisions | Granted | Denied | Remanded |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 77 | 6.5% | 36.4% | 51.9% |
| 2018 | 133 | 14.3% | 38.3% | 44.4% |
| 2019 | 90 | 12.2% | 35.6% | 53.3% |
| 2021 | 55 | 16.4% | 14.5% | 67.3% |
Evidence in granted and denied polyneuritis specified otherwise as due to nutrition deficiency decisions
For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the polyneuritis specified otherwise as due to nutrition deficiency 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 | 63 | 70.3% | 19.8% | +50.5 pts |
| Favorable VA exam | 42 | 61.9% | 24.3% | +37.6 pts |
| Claimed as secondary | 225 | 49.0% | 12.8% | +36.2 pts |
| Private medical opinion | 170 | 42.5% | 20.1% | +22.4 pts |
| Lay statement | 429 | 26.9% | 31.0% | −4.0 pts |
- The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 77.3% of the decisions that granted polyneuritis specified otherwise as due to nutrition deficiency.
- The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 47.0% of grants and 8.1% 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 polyneuritis specified otherwise as due to nutrition deficiency 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Negative nexus opinion | 211 | 20.4% | 33.1% | −12.7 pts |
| Unfavorable VA exam | 283 | 21.5% | 35.6% | −14.1 pts |
Why the Board granted or denied polyneuritis specified otherwise as due to nutrition deficiency
Most common reasons in grants
- Caused by the service-connected disability15
- Service connection established8
- Current diagnosis established8
- Secondary service connection granted2
Most common reasons in denials
- No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis25
- Preponderance of the evidence against the claim18
- Service records negative or silent14
- No current diagnosis12
- No continuity of symptomatology6
- Aggravated by the service-connected disability6
- Current diagnosis established6
- VA examiner: less likely than not related to service5
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 polyneuritis specified otherwise as due to nutrition deficiency decisions
Granted
Evidence establishes moderately severe incomplete paralysis of the right sciatic nerve.; Evidence is persuasively against a finding of muscle atrophy.; Granted 40% rating.
Service connection granted as secondary to DM; VA medical records show BLEPN related to DM
Favorable finding of diagnosis and in-service event from RO; Recharacterization of claim to include neuropathy and sciatica; Veteran's credible testimony of in-service fall and subsequent symptoms; High probative value assigned to private medical opinion linking TERA to neurotoxicity; Application of benefit of the doubt rule due to approximate balance of evidence
Denied
Evidence weighed against diagnosis of diabetic neuropathy
No diagnosis or pertinent complaints during service or post-service records.; Private chiropractor diagnosis lacked clinical testing and medical analysis.; Veteran failed to attend scheduled VA examination.
No in-service complaints, treatment, or diagnosis; No evidence of potential association with service; Evidence persuasively against the claim
Rules that apply to polyneuritis specified otherwise as due to nutrition deficiency 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 polyneuritis specified otherwise as due to nutrition deficiency 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 polyneuritis specified otherwise as due to nutrition deficiency 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.