OCULAR ISCHEMIA IN HIGH MYOPIA TREATED WITH INTRAVENOUS PROSTAGLANDIN E1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Background: High myopia is associated with a decreased ocular blood flow. In some cases this ocular ischemia may be the cause of severe visual loss. Methods: Three patients with high myopia and progressive loss of visual acuity had a diagnosis of ocular ischemia by color Doppler. Intravenous prostaglandin E1, a powerful vasodilator of the microcirculation, was used to treat the ocular ischemia in all 3 patients. Results: The visual acuity improved in all three cases with one patient improving from 20/100 to 20/30. The mean deficit of the visual fields in this patient improved from −19.08 to −9.52 after treatment. The treatment was repeated every 6 weeks to 8 weeks. Conclusion: Patients with high myopia and progressive visual acuity loss should be evaluated for ocular ischemia. Intravenous prostaglandin E1 should be considered in those cases of ocular ischemia with visual loss. Unfortunately the effect does not last for more than 6 weeks to 8 weeks and needs to be repeated at this interval for extended periods. Three patients with high myopia and progressive loss of visual acuity had color Doppler imaging revealing ocular ischemia. They were treated with intravenous prostaglandin E1 for their ischemia with visual improvement. The effect of the treatment can last for up to 8 weeks at which time it must be repeated.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".