Incidence and Prognostic Implications of Diplopia in Patients with Giant Cell Arteritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To the Editor: Giant cell arteritis (GCA) is the most common systemic vasculitis, with an incidence increasing with advanced age1. Patients present with a systemic inflammatory syndrome with constitutional symptoms and/or with ischemic events resulting from vascular occlusion including temporary or permanent visual loss1,2,3,4. Another less-recognized ophthalmologic manifestation of GCA is diplopia. Previous studies reported diplopia to occur among 6–20% of patients with ophthalmic symptoms and in 3–8% of unselected patients with GCA5,6,7. Diplopia, along with jaw claudication, is a symptom that correlates with a positive biopsy finding8. Diplopia might be temporary and thus might be missed. We prospectively analyzed incidence, clinical presentation, and outcome of patients with diplopia at diagnosis within our prospective single-center GCA cohort ( Basler Riesenzellarteriitis Kohorte : BARK). The center’s institutional review board approved our study. Briefly, patients presenting at the University Hospital Basel with newly diagnosed GCA according to American College of Rheumatology criteria9 were included after having given informed consent. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, and radiologic (including vascular ultrasound10) data of all patients were recorded at … Address correspondence to Dr. T. Daikeler, Division of Rheumatology, University Hospital Basel, Petersgraben 4, 4031 Basel, Switzerland. E-mail: thomas.daikeler{at}usb.ch
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 | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".