MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119086529 · doi:10.1159/000439445

Retinal Pigment Epithelium Tears: Risk Factors, Mechanism and Therapeutic Monitoring

2015· review· en· W2119086529 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

VenueOphthalmologica · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University Medical Centre
FundersNational Eye Institute
KeywordsMedicineTearsMacular degenerationRetinal pigment epitheliumOphthalmologyRetinalVisual acuityArtificial tearsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tears of the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) are most commonly associated with vascularised RPE detachment due to age-related macular degeneration (AMD), and they usually involve a deleterious loss in visual acuity. Recent studies suggest an increase in RPE tear incidences since the introduction of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapies as well as a temporal association between the tear event and the intravitreal injection. As the number of AMD patients and the number of administered anti-VEGF injections increase, both the challenge of RPE tear prevention and the treatment after RPE tear formation have become more important. At the same time, the evolution of retinal imaging has significantly contributed to a better understanding of RPE tear development in recent years. This review summarises the current knowledge on RPE tear development, predictive factors, and treatment strategies before and after RPE tear formation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.261 · 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