MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029688619 · doi:10.1136/bjo.2003.032383

Reduced vision in older adults with age related macular degeneration interferes with ability to care for self and impairs role as carer

2004· article· en· W2029688619 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Michael Stevenson

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Ophthalmology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilQueen's UniversityQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsMacular degenerationMedicineVisual acuityVisual impairmentEye careActivities of daily livingOptometryGerontologyAudiologyOphthalmologyPhysical therapyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To study the relation between visual impairment and ability to care for oneself or a dependant in older people with age related macular degeneration (AMD). METHOD: Cross sectional study of older people with visual impairment due to AMD in a specialised retinal service clinic. 199 subjects who underwent visual function assessment (fully corrected distance and near acuity and contrast sensitivity in both eyes), followed by completion of a package of questionnaires dealing with general health status (SF36), visual functioning (Daily Living Tasks Dependent on Vision, DLTV) and ability to care for self or provide care to others. The outcome measure was self reported ability to care for self and others. Three levels of self reported ability to care were identified--inability to care for self (level 1), ability to care for self but not others (level 2), and ability to care for self and others (level 3). RESULTS: People who reported good general health status and visual functioning (that is, had high scores on SF36 and DLTV) were more likely to state that they were able to care for self and others. Similarly people with good vision in the better seeing eye were more likely to report ability to care for self and others. People with a distance visual acuity (DVA) worse than 0.4 logMAR (Snellen 6/15) had less than 50% probability of assigning themselves to care level 3 and those with DVA worse than 1.0 logMAR (Snellen 6/60) had a probability of greater than 50% or for assigning themselves to care level 1. Regression analyses with level of care as the dependent variable and demographic factors, DLTV subscales, and SF36 dimensions as the explanatory variables confirmed that the DLTV subscale 1 was the most important variable in the transition from care level 3 to care level 2. The regression analyses also confirmed that the DLTV subscale 2 was the most important in the transition from care level 3 to care level 1. CONCLUSIONS: Ability to care for self and dependants has a strong relation with self reported visual functioning and quality of life and is adversely influenced by visual impairment. The acuity at which the balance of probability shifts in the direction of diminished ability to care for self or others is lower than the level set by social care agencies for provision of support. These findings have implications for those involved with visual rehabilitation and for studies of the cost effectiveness of interventions in AMD.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.595

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations59
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of OphthalmologySame topicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesFrench-language works237,207