CHOROIDAL DEGENERATION IN BIRDSHOT CHORIORETINOPATHY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Purpose: The purpose of the study was to determine if progressive choroidal changes occur in birdshot chorioretinopathy (BSCR). Methods: Retrospective chart review of all patients with BSCR who were seen over a 3-year period. Controls consisted of healthy age-matched and gender-matched patients. Choroidal thickness at baseline and final follow-up visit was measured with the use of optical coherence tomography. Results were analyzed using univariate and multivariable statistical models. Results: A total of 11 patients (22 eyes) with BSCR were identified. The majority of BSCR eyes (86%) had clinically inactive disease. Follow-up ranged from 2 months to 27 months. Mean age was 55 years. Patients with BSCR had significantly thinner choroid compared with controls (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the rate of choroid thinning for patients diagnosed with BSCR (2.68 μm per month) was significantly higher than that of controls (0.27 μm per month) (P = 0.003). There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of choroidal thinning between the two eyes of patients with BSCR (P = 0.859), indicating that the choroidal thinning was symmetrical. Conclusion: Despite having clinically inactive uveitis, eyes with BSCR can develop progressive choroidal thinning. The clinical relevance of this choroidal thinning, or degeneration, remains to be fully elucidated. The authors used optical coherence tomography to measure choroidal thickness and the rate of choroidal thinning in patients with birdshot chorioretinopathy. Patients with birdshot chorioretinopathy were found to have thinner choroid and an increased rate of choroidal thinning compared with normal controls, despite having clinically inactive uveitis.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".