Major breed distribution of canine patients enucleated or eviscerated due to glaucoma following routine cataract surgery as well as common histopathologic findings within enucleated globes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To identify the most significantly represented breeds that were enucleated or eviscerated due to intractable glaucoma following elective cataract surgery and to describe the major histopathologic features of enucleated globes. METHODS: A retrospective review of the Comparative Ocular Pathology Laboratory of Wisconsin database revealed 153 canine evisceration or enucleation submissions that met inclusion criteria. The most commonly represented breeds were identified, and enucleated globes of these breeds were further evaluated histologically (n = 69). Following standard hematoxylin & eosin staining, globes were evaluated for the presence of; corneal pathology, goniodysgenesis, pigment dispersion, pre-iridal fibrovascular membranes (PIFVMs), peripheral anterior, and/or posterior synechiation, inflammatory infiltrates, lens pathology, retinal pathology, and/or endophthalmitis. RESULTS: The most significantly represented breeds were the Cocker Spaniel (11.7%), Boston Terrier (10.5%), Labrador Retriever (6.5%), Bichon Frise (6.5%), Shih Tzu (5.8%), and Jack Russell Terrier (5.8%). Common histopathologic findings included inflammatory keratitis, the presence of PIFVMs, and lymphoplasmacytic uveal infiltrates. CONCLUSIONS: The Cocker Spaniel, Boston Terrier, Labrador Retriever, Bichon Frise, Shih Tzu, and Jack Russell Terrier may be at increased risk of the development of glaucoma following elective cataract surgery. These findings have potential clinical implications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".