Correlation Between the Indiana Bleb Appearance Grading Scale and Intraocular Pressure After Phacotrabeculectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the relationship between bleb morphology, recorded using the Indiana Bleb Appearance Grading Scale (IBAGS), and intraocular pressure (IOP) after phacotrabeculectomy. METHODS: Two years postphacotrabeculectomy, a single observer compared bleb morphology to the IBAGS standard photographs in 76 eyes of 76 patients. In addition, the presence or absence of microcysts was recorded. IOP was also measured. RESULTS: On multivariate analysis increasing bleb height was associated with a low IOP (P=0.017). An increase in IBAGS height score by 1 U resulted in a reduction in IOP of 2.16 mm Hg (95% confidence interval=0.40-3.92 mm Hg). In this study, there was no association between vascularity, bleb extent or microcysts, and IOP. There were no cases of bleb leak in this series. CONCLUSIONS: Two years postphacotrabeculectomy increased bleb height, as measured by the IBAGS, was associated with a decrease in IOP, with a 1 point increase in IBAGS height score resulting in a decrease of 2.16 mm Hg. We found no association between bleb extent, vascularity, or the presence or absence of conjunctival microcysts. As there were no cases of bleb leak in this study this characteristic could not be evaluated.
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) | 0.000 | 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".