PREVALENCE AND ASSOCIATIONS OF MYELINATED RETINAL NERVE FIBERS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence, ocular, and systemic associations of myelinated retinal nerve fibers (MRNF) in a Caucasian cohort. METHODS: The Gutenberg Health Study (GHS) is a population-based, prospective cohort study encompassing 15,010 subjects in Germany. Gutenberg Health Study participants, aged 35 to 74 years, stratified for gender, decades of age, and residence were examined for ophthalmologic and systemic conditions. Optic disc centered and macular photographs were reviewed for the presence of MRNF. RESULTS: In 25,728 eyes of 12,906 participants (86.0% of the cohort), the prevalence of MRNF was 0.4%. In a binary logistic regression analysis, MRNF was positively associated with history of stroke (OR, 6.8; 95% CI, 2.9-16.1; P < 0.001). Myelinated retinal nerve fibers was not associated with age, sex, cardiovascular conditions other than stroke or ocular parameters, such as refraction, visual acuity, intraocular pressure, or central corneal thickness. CONCLUSION: This population-based study provides novel data on the prevalence of MRNF in Western Europe. We report a positive association between history of stroke and MRNF. It adds an additional retinal sign for stroke and calls for further studying of the behavior of oligodendrocytes within cerebrovascular diseases.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".