MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091679813 · doi:10.1167/iovs.07-1353

Computerized Analysis of Retinal Vessel Width and Tortuosity in Premature Infants

2008· article· en· W2091679813 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueInvestigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinopathy of Prematurity Studies
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTortuosityRetinalRetinopathy of prematurityGrading (engineering)ReproducibilityMedicineOphthalmologyBiomedical engineeringMathematicsMaterials scienceStatisticsEngineeringGestational age

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To determine, with novel software, the feasibility of measuring the tortuosity and width of retinal veins and arteries from digital retinal images of infants at risk of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). METHODS: The Computer-Aided Image Analysis of the Retina (CAIAR) program was developed to enable semiautomatic detection of retinal vasculature and measurement of vessel tortuosity and width from digital images. CAIAR was tested for accuracy and reproducibility of tortuosity and width measurements by using computer-generated vessel-like lines of known frequency, amplitude, and width. CAIAR was then tested by using clinical digital retinal images for correlation of vessel tortuosity and width readings compared with expert ophthalmologist grading. RESULTS: When applied to 16 computer-generated sinusoidal vessels, the tortuosity measured by CAIAR correlated very well with the known values. Width measures also increased as expected. When the CAIAR readings were compared with five expert ophthalmologists' grading of 75 vessels on 10 retinal images, moderate correlation was found in 10 of the 14 tortuosity output calculations (Spearman rho = 0.618-0.673). Width was less well correlated (rho = 0.415). CONCLUSIONS: The measures of tortuosity and width in CAIAR were validated using sequential model vessel analysis. On comparison of CAIAR output with assessments made by expert ophthalmologists, CAIAR correlates moderately with tortuosity grades, but less well with width grades. CAIAR offers the opportunity to develop an automated image analysis system for detecting the vascular changes at the posterior pole, which are becoming increasingly important in diagnosing treatable ROP.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.199
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.010
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.341
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