Optic nerve appearance as a predictor of visual outcome in patients with idiopathic intracranial hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: It remains unclear whether the presence of optic disc haemorrhages (ODH) or cotton wool spots (CWS) at presentation in patients with papilloedema from idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) has prognostic value. The aim of this study was to determine if optic disc appearance at presentation predicts visual outcome in patients with IIH. METHODS: Retrospective study of 708 eyes of 360 consecutive patients with IIH who had baseline optic disc photographs before or within 30 days of their diagnostic lumbar puncture and initiation of medical treatment. Optic disc photographs were independently graded by three ophthalmologists in a standardised manner. Visual function was assessed using Snellen converted to logMAR visual acuity, Humphrey mean deviation and visual field grade. RESULTS: At least one ODH was found in 201 (28.4%) eyes, at least one CWS was found in 101 (14.3%) eyes and 88 eyes had both ODH and CWS (12.4%). At presentation, Frisén grade was associated with the presence and severity of ODH and CWS (p<0.001). ODH were associated with a worse visual acuity and CWS were associated with a worse visual field grade and mean deviation at presentation (p<0.05). Frisén grade was associated with worse visual function at presentation and final follow-up (p<0.001). Neither ODH nor CWS at presentation were associated with visual function at final follow-up when controlling for the Frisén grade. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: ODH and CWS at baseline are not independent predictors of final visual function in IIH when controlling for the severity of papilloedema.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".