Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The cover illustration shows a painting of Allvar Gullstrand painted in 1915, 4 years after he received the Nobel Prize for medicine. This issue is dedicated to the centennial of Allvar Gullstrand’s Nobel Prize. He is the only ophthalmologist ever to receive this prestigious price. Stefan Seregard writes an editorial commemorating this event. This is followed by an historical article by Ehinger and Grzybowski on the life and times of Allvar Gullstrand. Yilmaz et al. in USA, Spain and Ireland review the use of intravitreal bevacizumab for diabetic macular oedema. This is an extensive review of the literature for this new and important treatment modality. Lundström et al. in Sweden and Australia found the Catquest questionnaire useful for measuring self-assessed visual function before and after cataract surgery. Mönestam and Behndig found that light scattering and glistening in intraocular lenses does not affect visual acuity. Gazieva et al. in Denmark performed LASIK with two types of laser systems, both which effectively reduce high degrees of myopia with reasonable but slightly different predictability. Rijneveld et al. in the Netherlands found that emergency corneal grafts fail mostly due to host factors, not the quality of the donor tissue. Reinshagen et al. in Switzerland and Germany used mesenchymal stem cell in rabbits to treat total limbal stem cell deficiency. Heijl et al. in Sweden and USA report that intraocular pressure reduction with drug treatment depends on the baseline IOP level and suggest that the baseline IOP level should be documented when reporting treatment effect on intraocular pressure. Larsson et al. in Sweden used the Heidelberg retina tomography system to evaluate optic nerve heads in children. Lin et al. in Taiwan describe lacrimal canaliculitis in a series of patients. Mehlsen et al. in Denmark found that a calcium channel blocker and an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor did not influence retinal autoregulation in diabetic patients. Kook et al. in Germany found that intravitreal bevacizumab and/or triamcinolone do not provide long-term improvement for diabetic macular oedema. Kofoed et al. in Copenhagen found that hyperbaric oxygen exposure influenced electrophysiological components related to bipolar in Müller cells. It did not influence retinal thickness. Holton et al. in Denmark examined the influence of light source on contrast sensitivity in patients with AMD. They found that full spectral radiance incandescent light sources seem optimal. Available on http://www.actaophthalmologica.com Stalmans and a large international group review extensively the use of colour Doppler imaging in ocular blood flow research. Founti et al. in Greece and USA found good reproducibility between technicians in imaging retrobulbar blood flow in healthy volunteers. Frøen et al. in Norway and Hungary found that cells from the iris pigment epithelium have limited capabilities as retinal stem cells. Andjelić et al. in Slovenia found that lens capsule contraction with changing in calcium levels or mechanical stimulus. Sieving in USA explains Medline indexing and keywords. Bull in Bergen proposes that fireworks should be banned to reduce eye injuries. Basit et al. in Trondheim describe a case of Wernicke’s encephalopathy in a young boy. Russo et al. in Liverpool found scleral calcification in a case of recurrent melanoma after brachytherapy. Rama et al. in Italy report severe keratitis following corneal cross-linking for keratoconus. Jonas and Jonas in Germany compare peripapillary scleral thickness in glaucoma patients and normal subjects. Lim and An in Korea report good results after epiretinal membrane removal. Kernt et al. in Germany had good experiences with focal and panretinal photocoagulation with a navigated laser. Fielden et al. in Canada describe a cluster of cases with intraocular inflammation following bevacizumab injection. Bloch et al. in Denmark and Egypt describe neovascular membrane contraction and retinal pigment epithelial rupture following verteporfin and bevacizumab treatment. Caramoy et al. in Germany found recurrent choroidal neovascular membrane after autologous RPE transplantation. I wish all readers a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year and hope that they enjoy reading ACTA during the holidays.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».