MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104032286 · doi:10.3109/01676830903071232

Development of Thyroid-Related Orbitopathy Following Cataract Surgery

2009· article· en· W2104032286 on OpenAlexaff
Boey Pui Yi, Seah Lay Leng, Loh Boon Kwang, Jack Rootman

Bibliographic record

VenueOrbit · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Eye Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCataract surgerySurgeryThyroidOptic neuropathyPresentation (obstetrics)OphthalmologyOptic nerve

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To report a case series of patients who had manifestation or aggravation of thyroid related orbitopathy (TRO) following cataract surgery in an Asian eye centre. METHODS: A systematic review of clinical records of patients with manifestation or aggravation of TRO was conducted. Inclusion criteria were manifestation or aggravation of TRO within 6 months of cataract surgery. RESULTS: Five patients treated for TRO at Singapore National Eye Centre from January 2007 to December 2008 were included in the study. There were 2 males and 3 females with mean age of 54.6 years (range 51-86). Surgery included phacoemulsification with implantation of intraocular lens. The mean interval between surgery and manifestation of symptoms was 7.4 weeks. Contralateral eye involvement was seen in all patients. Clinical presentation of orbitopathy ranged from increased soft issue swelling, proptosis and progression of myopathy to compressive optic neuropathy. One patient had total loss of vision. Mean follow-up was 21 months (range 2-60). CONCLUSION: TRO can present shortly after cataract surgery and lead to serious vision threatening complications. Patients will need to be counseled pre-operatively regarding the risk of post-operative period.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrbitSame topicOphthalmology and Eye DisordersFrench-language works237,207