Indications for eye removal over a 13-year period at an ophthalmology referral center in São Paulo, Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE:: To analyze the indications and types of eye removal at Latin America's highest-volume ophthalmic reference center in São Paulo, Brazil. METHODS:: A retrospective analysis was conducted of surgical pathological reports in the electronic database of the Ophthalmology Department of the Universidade Federal de São Paulo Hospital of patients who underwent eye-removal procedures between January 2000 and December 2012. RESULTS:: A total of 412 cases met the inclusion criteria for this study. The most common indications for eye removal were ocular melanoma and retinoblastoma, representing 35.4% and 31.1% of the total cases, respectively. Other frequent indications included endophthalmitis (6.3%), nonspecific inflammation (4.1%), squamous cell carcinoma (3.6%), panophthalmitis (3.4%), and phthisis bulbi (1.2%). The remaining indications accounted for 14.8% of all cases, with each accounting for <1% of the total cases. Enucleation was the most common eye-removal procedure seen in our study. CONCLUSIONS:: The two most common indications for eye removal were ocular melanoma and retinoblastoma. Alternative treatment options are effective in limiting the need for eye removal but are constrained by our public center's so cioeconomic context.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".