MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

IMAGING THE RETINA BY EN FACE OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY

2006· article· en· W2083394339 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mirjam E. J. van Velthoven, Frank D. Verbraak, Lawrence A. Yannuzzi, Richard B. Rosen, Adrian Podoleanu, Marc D. de Smet

Bibliographic record

VenueRetina · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal and Macular Surgery
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptical coherence tomographyRetinalRetinaOphthalmoscopyConfocalMedicineOptometryOphthalmologyOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To present the possibilities of a new system that combines optical coherence tomography (OCT) and confocal ophthalmoscopy, producing en face OCT images in patients with retinal diseases. METHODS: A prototype OCT Ophthalmoscope (OTI, Toronto, Canada) was used to scan patients with retinal conditions. The system uses a super luminescent diode (lambda = 820 nm; Deltalambda = 20 nm) and currently scans at a rate of 2 frames per second. In each frame, the OCT Ophthalmoscope simultaneously produces a transversal OCT scan and a confocal image in the X/Y plane. Both images correspond pixel to pixel. RESULTS: Between January 2002 and August 2003, >800 patients with various retinal diseases were scanned with the OCT Ophthalmoscope. Illustrative cases with regularly seen macular diseases are presented, such as macular hole and central serous retinopathy. CONCLUSION: Current difficulties as well as future possibilities of this new en face OCT ophthalmoscope are discussed. By presenting normal and pathologic transversal OCT images made by a prototype OCT Ophthalmoscope, we show that it can provide information not available using conventional OCT imaging.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations65
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRetinaSame topicRetinal and Macular SurgeryFrench-language works237,207