What percentage of patients presenting for routine eye examinations require referral for secondary care? A study of referrals from optometrists to ophthalmologists
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim was to investigate the percentage of asymptomatic patients presenting for routine optometric eye examinations that have pathology or pathology-related risk factors warranting referral for ophthalmological consultation. METHODS: This was a retrospective, cohort case study and the inclusion criteria for participants included: (i) the patient presented for routine optometric eye care during a specified period of time; (ii) the patient was found to have pathology (or showed enough risk of pathology) resulting in referral to an ophthalmologist; and (iii) a referral report was received from the consulting ophthalmologist stating the diagnosis and the treatment plan. The data set was further reviewed to indicate presenting symptoms and patient age. Adult patients, ages 20 to 64 years, were reviewed separately; this age group is not covered by provincial health services for routine eye care in Nova Scotia. Files were obtained from two clinics through an electronic charting program. A database was created that included date of referral, clinical reasons for the referral, diagnosis and treatment plan. Clinical reasons for referral were extracted from the referral letters and reports and sorted into six disease categories: age-related macular degeneration, cataract, glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy, retinopathy and 'other'. RESULTS: The overall referral rate for the combined data set was nine per cent for all ages; 2.4 per cent of the overall patients were asymptomatic. There was a similar number of asymptomatic patients referred in the adult (20 to 64 years) age group compared to all ages (2.5 per cent). CONCLUSION: A significant number of patients that present for routine eye examinations without any symptoms indicative of ocular disease are subsequently found to have a degree of pathology or risk thereof requiring referral for ophthalmological consultation. These referrals occur for adults under 64 years as much as for all patients of all ages.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it