MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018387914 · doi:10.1001/jama.2009.1714

Acute-Onset Floaters and Flashes

2009· review· en· W2018387914 on OpenAlexaff
Hussein Hollands, Davin Johnson, Anya C. Brox, David R.P. Almeida, David L. Simel, Sanjay Sharma

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal and Macular Surgery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePosterior vitreous detachmentOphthalmologyRetinal detachmentConfidence intervalEye examinationRetinalPhysical examinationVisual acuitySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Acute onset of monocular floaters and/or flashes represents a common presentation to primary care physicians, and the most likely diagnosis is posterior vitreous detachment (PVD). A significant proportion of patients with acute PVD develop an associated retinal tear that can lead to retinal detachment and permanent vision loss if left untreated. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the association between relevant clinical variables and risk of retinal tear in patients presenting with acute-onset floaters and/or flashes and PVD. DATA SOURCES: Structured MEDLINE (January 1950-September 2009) and EMBASE (January 1980-September 2009) searches and a hand search of references and citations of retrieved articles yielded 17 relevant studies. STUDY SELECTION: Studies of high-level methods that related elements of the history or physical examination in patients presenting with floaters and/or flashes and PVD to the likelihood of retinal tear. RESULTS: For patients with acute onset of floaters and/or flashes who are self-referred or referred to an ophthalmologist, the prevalence of retinal tear is 14% (95% confidence interval [CI], 12%-16%). Subjective visual reduction is the most important symptom associated with retinal tear (likelihood ratio [LR], 5.0; 95% CI, 3.1-8.1). Vitreous hemorrhage on slitlamp biomicroscopy is the best-studied finding with the narrowest positive LR for retinal tear (summary LR, 10; 95% CI, 5.1-20). Absence of vitreous pigment during this examination is the best-studied finding with the narrowest negative LR (summary LR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.12-0.43). Patients initially diagnosed as having uncomplicated PVD have a 3.4% chance of a retinal tear within 6 weeks. The risk increases with new onset of at least 10 floaters (summary LR, 8.1-36) or subjective visual reduction (summary LR, 2.3-17) during this period. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physicians should evaluate patients with acute-onset floaters and/or flashes due to suspected PVD, or patients with known PVD and a change in symptoms, for high-risk features of retinal tear and detachment. Physicians should always assess these patients' visual acuity. Patients at increased risk should be triaged for urgent ophthalmologic assessment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations125
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMASame topicRetinal and Macular SurgeryFrench-language works237,207