Retinal blood flow reduction after panretinal photocoagulation in Type 2 diabetes mellitus: Doppler optical coherence tomography flowmeter pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To use a Doppler optical coherence tomography (DOCT) flowmeter to investigate segmental retinal blood flow (RBF) and sum of the segmental RBFs (SRBF) changes after panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) was used to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus with severe diabetic retinopathy (DR). Data from five patients with proliferative DR (PDR) (mean age 51.9 ± 10.5 years) was analyzed. The vessel diameter (D), average velocity (V), and retinal blood flow (RBF) in veins were measured using a DOCT flowmeter before and four weeks after PRP. Segmental RBF from inferotemporal (IT), superotemporal (ST), inferonasal (IN), and superonasal (SN) veins were measured, and SRBF was defined as the sum of these measurements. All data were analyzed by Wilcoxson test. After PRP, there were statistically significant decreases in the every segmental D, V, RBF (P<0.03) and SRBF (P = 0.002). The other parameters showed no statistically significant differences (P>0.05). The DOCT flowmeter has the potential to be a clinically useful tool to noninvasively evaluate the changes in retinal circulation during PRP in patients with PDR.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".