Factors Associated with Optic Disc Hemorrhages in a Longitudinal Study of Patients with Open-angle Glaucoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate ocular and systemic features associated with optic disc haemorrhages (ODH) in a cohort of glaucoma patients. Methods: Patients with open-angle glaucoma followed in two prospective studies were included. Presence of ODH at any of their visits and information on systemic diseases, ocular parameters and use of aspirin were recorded. Multivariate analysis of survival time, using ODH as the end-point, was carried out to evaluate the association between ODH and several ocular or systemic features. In order to investigate if ODH occurred at higher or lower intraocular pressure (IOP), we calculated the difference between the IOP at the time the ODH was detected and the average IOP of the previous 3 visits. As a control, the same analysis was performed in patients with no ODH, using a randomly selected visit. Results: 137 patients with follow-up of 9.6 ± 5.0 years were included. The mean number of visits per year was 3.0 ± 1.0. Fifty eyes (38 patients; 28%) had ODH at least once during follow-up, totalling 98 episodes. ODH were significantly associated with diabetes (P = 0.002; hazard ratio = 4.12; CI: 1.72 to 9.90) and use of aspirin (P = 0.03; hazard ratio = 2.25; C.I.: 1.10 to 4.62). At the time the ODH was detected, the IOP was significantly lower than the previous 3 visits (-1.1 + 2.5 mmHg, P = 0.014); in patients with no ODH, no significant difference was found between a randomly selected visit and the previous 3 visits (-0.35 ± 3.6 mmHg, P = 0.33). Conclusions: Diabetes and use of aspirin were associated with occurrence of ODH in patients followed at regular intervals. During a patient’s follow-up, ODH tend to be detected at relatively lower levels of IOP.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".