MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2463763190 · doi:10.1097/wno.0000000000000404

Longitudinal Study of Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness and Macular Volume in Patients With Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorder

2016· article· en· W2463763190 on OpenAlexaff
Praveena Manogaran, Anthony Traboulsee, Alex P. Lange

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuro-Ophthalmology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNerve fiber layerNeuromyelitis opticaRetinalSpectrum disorderMedicineOphthalmologyMultiple sclerosisPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Neuromyelitis spectrum disorder (NMOSD) is a rare autoimmune disorder previously thought to be a subtype of multiple sclerosis (MS). NMOSD is characterized by episodes of inflammation and damage to astrocytes that primarily results in damage to optic nerve and spinal cord. The objective of this exploratory study was to use optical coherence tomography (OCT) to measure axonal and neuronal health in NMOSD eyes over time. METHODS: Nine patients with definite NMOSD were assessed at baseline and follow-up visits (time between visits: 35-55 months). OCT assessment involved a macular volume protocol and a retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness scan. RESULTS: The temporal, inferior, nasal, or superior quadrant and the mean global RNFL thickness, macular thickness, and volume of each NMOSD patient was unchanged compared with baseline for each eye separately and both together. There also was no change between the 2 time points for the OCT measures for eyes affected and unaffected by optic neuritis and all eyes together except for a significant change in the temporal RNFL quadrant when all NMOSD eyes were pooled together (mean = 2.88 μm, SD = 3.7, P = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: Unlike in MS eyes, ongoing RNFL and macular thinning secondary to brain and optic nerve atrophy could not be observed in NMOSD eyes during an observation period of 4 years. This might be an additional marker to distinguish these 2 diseases. However, to confirm this finding, more long-term data are needed to compare these 2 diseases longitudinally.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations24
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuro-OphthalmologySame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207