MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2262817715 · doi:10.3928/15428877-20060901-03

Serial Optical Coherence Tomography of Subthreshold Diode Laser Micropulse Photocoagulation for Diabetic Macular Edema

2006· article· en· W2262817715 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jeffrey K. Luttrull, Charles J. Spink

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmic surgery, lasers & imaging retina · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOptical coherence tomographyOphthalmologyEdemaDiabetic macular edemaSubthreshold conductionMacular edemaDiabetic retinopathySurgeryRetinalDiabetes mellitus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<H4>BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE</H4> <P> To use serial optical coherence tomography (OCT) to evaluate low-intensity, high-density subthreshold diode laser micropulse photocoagulation treatment of clinically significant diabetic macular edema. </P> <H4>PATIENTS AND METHODS</H4> <P> Eighteen consecutive eyes of 14 patients with clinically significant diabetic macular edema and a minimum foveal thickness of 223 µm or greater were prospectively evaluated by OCT preoperatively and 1, 4, and 12 weeks following treatment. </P> <H4>RESULTS </H4> <P>Overall, estimated macular edema 3 months postoperatively (minimum foveal thickness – 223 µm) was reduced a mean of 24% (<I>P</I> = .02). Eleven eyes treated for recurrent or persistent clinically significant diabetic macular edema following prior treatment more than 3 months before study entry were most improved, with a mean reduction in estimated macular edema 3 months postoperatively of 59%. No treatment complications were observed. No patient demonstrated laser lesions following treatment. </P> <H4>CONCLUSIONS</H4> <P> Low-intensity, high-density subthreshold diode laser micropulse photocoagulation can reduce or eliminate clinically significant diabetic macular edema measured by OCT. Further study is warranted. </P> <P>[<CITE>Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging</CITE> 2006;37:370-377.] </P> <H4>AUTHORS</H4> <P>Drs. Luttrull and Spink are in private practice, Ventura, California. </P> <P>Accepted for publication May 17, 2006. </P> <P>Presented in part at the annual meeting of the American Society of Retina Specialists, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, July 16-20, 2005. </P> <P>Address reprint requests to Jeffrey K. Luttrull, MD, 3160 Telegraph Road, Suite 230, Ventura, CA 93003. </P>

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations78
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOphthalmic surgery, lasers & imaging retinaSame topicRetinal Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207