MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057811332 · doi:10.1089/tmj.2007.0068

Optometric Referrals to Retina Specialists: Evaluation and Triage via Teleophthalmology

2008· article· en· W2057811332 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueTelemedicine Journal and e-Health · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineReferralTelemedicineTriageOptometryOphthalmologyMedical emergencyHealth careFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A retrospective noncomparative consecutive case series was conducted to evaluate the clinical outcomes of a novel teleophthalmology program linking optometrists to retina specialists in Alberta, Canada. One hundred seventy-one patients, referred by optometrists via teleophthalmology to a group retina practice between June 2004 and May 2006 underwent stereoscopic, mydriatic digital photography. Images were transmitted to a secure Web server and analyzed by a retina specialist. Diagnosis and recommendations were sent back to the optometrist and, if necessary, patients were referred for additional testing and clinical evaluation. A chart review of all clinical encounters was performed and the data was tabulated. Demographic features, diagnosis, testing, treatment, distance and time traveled by patient, durations between telemedicine referral, teleophthalmology consultation, in-person consultation, testing, and treatment were recorded. One hundred seventy patients were assessed via teleophthalmology for a total of 190 consultations. Eighty-nine patients (52.0%) required conventional in-person consultation with a referral completion success of 92.1% (82 patients). Fifty of these patients underwent additional diagnostic testing including fluorescein angiography (41), optical coherence tomography (14), laboratory testing (5), visual fields (2), carotid Doppler ultrasound (2), and ocular ultrasound (2). Twenty-five patients required surgical or medical treatment including focal argon laser (10), photodynamic therapy (8), panretinal photocoagulation (2), vitrectomy (2), scleral buckle (1), and other procedures (8). Average wait time between telemedicine referral and teleophthalmology review of images by the retina specialist was 1.9 days (maximum = 20 days). For those patients requiring office evaluation, the average wait time between teleophthalmology referral and in-person evaluation was 25.1 days. Twenty-one of the 25 patients (84.0%) requiring treatment underwent examination, testing, and treatment in a single day. When compared to conventional consultation methods, teleophthalmology reduced average travel distance and time by 219.1 km and 2.7 hours, respectively. Teleophthalmology reduced office visits to the retina specialist by 48% while improving the efficiency of clinical examination, testing, and treatment. Patients benefited through reduced travel time and distance.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.625
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.308 · 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