Peripapillary Choroidal Thickness in Healthy Controls and Patients With Focal, Diffuse, and Sclerotic Glaucomatous Optic Disc Damage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine peripapillary choroidal thickness in healthy controls and in patients with glaucoma who have focal, diffuse, and sclerotic optic disc damage. METHODS: Healthy controls (n=92) and patients with glaucoma who have focal (n=34), diffuse (n=35), and sclerotic (n=34) optic disc damage were imaged with spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (12° circular scan protocol centered on optic nerve head). Peripapillary choroidal thickness was measured as the distance between the automatically segmented retinal pigment epithelium/Bruch's membrane and the manually outlined interface between the posterior choroid and the anterior border of the sclera in eyes in which the anterior scleral border was visible over more than 85% of the scan circumference. RESULTS: The anterior scleral border was visible in 76 controls (83%) and 89 patients (86%). Peripapillary choroidal thickness in healthy controls decreased linearly with age (-11 μm/decade; P.001; r2=0.16), with a predicted value of 137 μm at age 70 years (95% prediction interval, 62-212 μm). While this value was similar in patients with focal and diffuse optic disc damage (126 and 130 μm, respectively; P=.22 compared with controls), it was approximately 30% lower in patients with sclerotic optic disc damage (96 μm; P.001 compared with controls). CONCLUSIONS: The peripapillary choroid of patients with glaucoma who have sclerotic optic disc damage was approximately 25% to 30% thinner compared with that in patients with focal and diffuse optic disc damage and with that in healthy controls. The role of the choroid in the pathophysiology of sclerotic glaucomatous optic disc damage needs further investigation.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".