SPONTANEOUS IMPROVEMENT OF SYPHILIS CHORIORETINITIS: CASE REPORT AND REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe a case of spontaneous improvement of syphilis chorioretinitis and review the literature. METHODS: Case report and literature review of cases with untreated syphilis chorioretinitis. RESULTS: A 58-year-old man presented to the emergency department with counting fingers vision, normal fundus, and disruption of the outer retinal layers on optical coherence tomography of the right eye. Examination by a retina specialist 3 weeks later revealed visual acuity of 20/50 and partial restoration of outer retinal layers on optical coherence tomography. Workup showed positive serology for syphilis and human immunodeficiency virus. Treatment with intravenous penicillin resulted in further vision improvement. Literature review showed six cases of spontaneous improvement of syphilis chorioretinitis. CONCLUSION: Spontaneous improvement of syphilis chorioretinitis is possible. Clinicians should keep a high index of suspicion and consider syphilis chorioretinitis in diseases that affect the outer retina even with spontaneous improvement.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".