MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2465228832 · doi:10.1097/icb.0000000000000356

INCIDENCE OF ACUTE EXUDATIVE MACULOPATHY AFTER REDUCED-FLUENCE PHOTODYNAMIC THERAPY

2016· review· en· W2465228832 on OpenAlexaff
Zaid Mammo, Farzin Forooghian

Bibliographic record

VenueRetinal Cases & Brief Reports · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhotodynamic therapyMaculopathyIncidence (geometry)VerteporfinOphthalmologyFluenceMacular degenerationChoroidal neovascularizationDermatologyRetinopathyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To describe the incidence and features of acute exudative maculopathy (AEM) after half-fluence photodynamic therapy (PDT) and/or very minimal fluence PDT. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of all patients treated over a 7-year period. RESULTS: A total of 52 patients (58 eyes, 140 treatments) were treated with half-fluence PDT and/or very minimal fluence PDT. Patients were diagnosed with either central serous chorioretinopathy (CSCR) or neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). Two patients (1 CSCR and 1 nAMD) returned to the clinic with acute vision loss after treatment and were identified as having developed AEM. In the CSCR case, resolution occurred after intravitreal bevacizumab treatment. The nAMD case resolved with topical difluprednate treatment. We were unable to identify any risk factors for the development of AEM. CONCLUSION: AEM seems to be a rare (incidence 1.4% per treatment) and unpredictable reaction related to the proinflammatory effects of half-fluence PDT and very minimal fluence PDT. Because of the inherent limitations of this study, the true incidence of AEM after reduced-fluence PDT may be higher.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.710
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations19
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRetinal Cases & Brief ReportsSame topicRetinal Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207