MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102709121 · doi:10.3109/09286580903450338

Delayed Presentation of Cataracts in Children: Are they Worth Operating Upon?

2010· article· en· W2102709121 on OpenAlex
Parikshit Gogate, Rajiv Khandekar, Meghna Shrishrimal, Kuldeep Dole, Sudhir Taras, Sucheta Kulkarni, Satish Ranade, Madan Deshpande

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

VenueOphthalmic Epidemiology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntraocular Surgery and Lenses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCataractsPresentation (obstetrics)Cataract surgeryBlindnessMicrosoft excelRetrospective cohort studyPediatricsEye careMedical recordSurgeryOphthalmologyOptometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Childhood cataract is an important cause of avoidable blindness in children. The study aimed to investigate the outcome of surgery in cataracts with delayed presentation which had been operated upon as new pediatric ophthalmology centers were set up in India. METHODS: This was a retrospective interventional case series from a community eye care center in Western India. Demographic, surgical, pre-operative and post-operative details were obtained from the patients records and entered into Microsoft excel and statistical analysis conducted using SPSS-11 software (SPSS, Chicago, IL). Vision was tested 6 weeks after surgery. The predictors of good vision (> or =6/18) were identified by regression analysis. If the interval between detection of cataract in children and their presentation for surgery was more than 18 months for developmental and 6 months for congenital the cataract was defined having a delayed presentation. RESULTS: Five hundred and twenty nine eyes of 437 children aged 2 months to 16 years were operated upon in 2004-2006. Preoperative vision was <3/60 in 405 (76.6%) eyes with cataract. Of these 529, 242 eyes were with delayed presentation of cataract (83 congenital and 149 other). 102 had up to 5 years, 91 had 6-10 years and 49 had >11 yrs delay in presentation. At 6 weeks following surgery, vision was > or = 6/18 in 36/93 (38.7%) of eyes with delayed presenting cataracts, as compared to 94/244 (38.5%) > or =6/18 in those without. CONCLUSION: Surgery for cataracts with delayed presentation helps to regain functional vision, which can be used for navigation and low vision aids.

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)0.003
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.447

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.306 · 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