Chronic Ocular Graft Versus Host Disease: An Update and Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An updated comprehensive literature review was completed of chronic ocular graft versus host disease (oGVHD) to identify current and future considerations as to the causes, diagnosis, and treatment of this complication after allogenic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Graft-versus-host disease involves multiple organ systems, including the eye, and is a leading cause of mortality and morbidity in these patients. This review consisted a comprehensive search of the PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov and NIH.gov databases. oGVHD is a debilitating and potentially sight threatening condition. Commonly involved ocular structures include the cornea, conjunctiva, meibomian glands, eyelids, lacrimal gland and tear film. Identifying and treating the ocular complications at the early stages may improve final outcomes and quality of life in these patients. Aggressive lubrication, preservation of tear film and inflammation control, including minimizing surface scarring, are treatment goals. Co-management with HCT and other pertinent health care providers is critical for early diagnosis and to initiate prompt therapy to minimize the ocular damage. Stepped therapy, including the use of emerging systemic treatments can be useful in the management of oGVHD with stable visual function, quality of life and complication management as goals of treatment.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".