The Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension Treatment Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objectives of this study were to present the rationale for the main aspects of the study design and describe the trial methodology for the Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension Treatment Trial (IIHTT). METHODS: Eligible candidates with mild visual field loss (automated perimetric mean deviation [PMD] -2 to -7 dB) were randomized to receive either acetazolamide or matching placebo tablets. Randomized participants were offered participation in a supervised dietary program. The primary outcome variable, PMD, was measured at 6 months. Additionally, cerebrospinal fluid from subjects and serum from study participants and matched controls were collected for genetic analysis and vitamin A studies. An ancillary optical coherence substudy was added to investigate the changes of papilledema in the optic nerve head and retina that correlate with Frisén grading, visual field deficits, and low-contrast visual acuity. RESULTS: The randomized trial entered 165 participants from March 17, 2010, through November 27, 2012, from the United States and Canada. The primary outcome (month 6) visits were successfully completed by June 15, 2013. Blood specimens were obtained from 165 controls without IIH to investigate vitamin A metabolism and genetic markers of potential risk factors for IIH. CONCLUSIONS: The IIHTT is the first randomized, double-masked placebo-controlled trial to study the effectiveness of medical treatment for patients with IIH.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.009 | 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".