MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2985982100 · doi:10.22608/apo.201871

Treatment of Nonarteritic Acute Central Retinal Artery Occlusion

2018· review· en· W2985982100 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAsia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal and Optic Conditions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCentral retinal artery occlusionMedicineEmbolusThrombolysisRetinal Artery OcclusionStroke (engine)CardiologyOphthalmologySurgeryVisual acuityRetinalMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Central retinal artery occlusion (CRAO) is an event most often caused by an embolus originating in the ipsilateral carotid artery, aortic arch, or heart. CRAO may result from partial or complete occlusion of the central retinal artery (CRA), which acts as the primary blood supply to the inner neurosensory retina, and typically results in profound vision loss and permanent visual disability. No consensus has emerged regarding the optimal treatment of CRAO. All proposed treatments are of questionable efficacy and many have uncertain risk profiles. In certain circumstances, thrombolysis may be attempted as a treatment option; however, the evidence to support broad use of thrombolytics in the treatment of acute CRAO remains elusive. It is known that the risk factors that predispose to other cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events are often present in CRAO. Accordingly, identification of patients at highest risk of stroke and secondary prevention of ischemic events remains the primary focus of management. This review offers a summary of the clinical presentation, diagnosis, and prognosis of CRAO, with an emphasis on treatment options.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.561
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.312 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it