Serial changes in lamina cribrosa depth and neuroretinal parameters in glaucoma. Impact of choroidal thickness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose To determine whether: (1) change in lamina cribrosa depth occurs more frequently than change in neuroretinal parameters in glaucoma, and (2) Bruch's membrane or anterior sclera should be used as a reference plane when measuring laminar depth. Design Prospective observational study. Participants One hundred fifty-five glaucoma patients and 35 healthy controls. Methods Anterior laminar depth from a Bruch's membrane (LD-BM) or anterior sclera (LD-AS) reference plane were measured with optical coherence tomography. Two neuroretinal parameters, minimum rim width and retinal nerve fiber layer thickness, in addition to peripapillary choroidal thickness were measured. Factors related to laminar depth were determined with mixed-effects modeling. Cutoffs for significant change in each parameter were estimated from variability in healthy controls over 1 year. The occurrences of significant change in laminar depth and neuroretinal parameters were compared with survival models. Because normal aging has a clear effect on neuroretinal parameters, but not on laminar depth, changes in neuroretinal parameters were adjusted for age-related reduction. Main Outcome Measures Longitudinal changes in laminar depth and neuroretinal parameters. Results Glaucoma patients were followed up for a mean of 3.90 years (range, 2.03–5.44 years). The LD-BM was influenced significantly more by choroidal thickness (1.14 μm/μm; 95% confidence interval, 1.07–1.21) than was the LD-AS (0.15 μm/μm; 95% confidence interval, 0.08–0.22). Posterior movement of the lamina (LD-BM increase or LD-AS increase) occurred with the same frequencies as thinning in neuroretinal parameters. Anterior movement of the lamina was detected more frequently with the Bruch's membrane (LD-BM decrease) compared with the anterior sclera (LD-AS decrease) reference plane (hazard ratio, 3.23; P Conclusions Lamina cribrosa depth should be measured from an anterior sclera reference plane to reduce the influence of choroidal thickness changes. In glaucoma patients, lamina cribrosa depth changes are detected with similar frequency as neuroretinal parameter changes.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".