Neuroradiologic Screening in Normal-Pressure Glaucoma: Study Results and Literature Review
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine if there was an increased prevalence of intracranial compressive lesions in patients with clinically diagnosed normal-pressure glaucoma compared with a group of patients with progressive primary open-angle glaucoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a prospective, comparative, observational case series, the authors performed cranial magnetic resonance imaging in patients with consecutively diagnosed normal-pressure glaucoma (n = 62) and progressive primary open-angle glaucoma with controlled intraocular pressures (n = 70). The prevalence of intracranial compressive lesions, demographic data, and clinical characteristics were compared between both groups. RESULTS: Four of the 62 (6.5%) patients with normal-pressure glaucoma had clinically relevant intracranial compressive lesions involving the anterior visual pathway, compared with none of the 70 patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (P = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: Intracranial compressive lesions are an important diagnostic consideration in the workup of normal-pressure glaucoma.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it