Congenital Orbital Fibrosis: A Distinct Clinical Entity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe congenital orbital fibrosis as a distinct clinical entity, and highlight its constellation of features. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective, noncomparative, interventional case series of 4 patients with congenital orbital fibrosis. One patient underwent exploration of the orbit, release and biopsy of scar tissue. Two patients underwent strabismus surgery. One of these also underwent upper eyelid lengthening. Blepharoptosis, eyelid retraction, enophthalmos, proptosis, presence of a diffusely infiltrating orbital mass with secondary involvement of extraocular muscles, and dysplasia of the affected bony orbit were identified. RESULTS: One patient presented with eyelid retraction, 1 with ptosis, and the remaining 2 had normal eyelid height. Furthermore, one patient demonstrated true enophthalmos. Of the remaining 3, 1 had symmetrical exophthalmometry, and 2 presented with proptosis. The later 2 patients presented with ipsilateral facial hypoplasia, accompanying orbital wall dysplasia and decreased orbital volume, confirmed on computed tomography. In addition, all patients demonstrated an irregular, retrobulbar mass located medially within the orbit, incorporating the medial rectus muscle. CONCLUSION: Congenital orbital fibrosis is a nonfamilial, nonprogressive, unilateral, distinct clinical entity, characterized by the presence of a diffusely infiltrating orbital mass with secondary involvement of extraocular muscles resulting in variable symptomatology due to the cicatricial process.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".