MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3090099321 · doi:10.1097/ijg.0000000000001620

Local Glaucomatous Defects of the Circumpapillary Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Show a Variety of Patterns of Progression

2020· article· en· W3090099321 on OpenAlexaff
Ha Min Kim, William Eugene McKee, Katarzyna Malendowicz, Abinaya Thenappan, Emmanouil Tsamis, Melvi Eguia, Carlos Gustavo De Moraes, Robert Ritch, Donald C. Hood

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Glaucoma · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
FundersNational Eye Institute
KeywordsNerve fiber layerMedicineRetinalGlaucomaOphthalmologyOptometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PRECIS: The region of glaucomatous progression, seen on optical coherence tomography (OCT) images of the circumpapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (cRNFL), increases in width and depth in all eyes, but shows a variety of different patterns of loss across eyes. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the patterns of cRNFL loss secondary to glaucomatous progression in a region associated with the superior hemifield of the 24-2/30-2 visual field (VF). METHODS: Twenty-four eyes (20 patients) with a diagnosis of glaucoma and evidence of progression on OCT had OCT disc cube scans on at least 3 separate visits (mean follow-up 7.4 y; range: 3.9 to 11.4). Circumpapillary b-scans were derived after enface images were aligned to assure that the study region (ie, 0 to -135 degrees, where 0 degree is 9 o'clock, on a right eye) coincided. Within this region, a region of progression (ROP) was defined based on the loss in cRNFL thickness between the first and subsequent visits. The width of the ROP was determined, along with the locations of its leading (close to fixation) and trailing edges. In addition, for each ROP, the location and depth at the point of maximal loss, total loss, and average remaining retinal nerve fiber layer were measured. RESULTS: The ROP proceeded both toward and away from fixation. Across eyes, the ROP varied widely in width (32 to 131 degrees, mean 82.7 degrees), location, and loss at point of deepest loss (22 to 99 μm, mean 52.9 μm), as well as total cRNFL loss. CONCLUSIONS: All eyes showed a widening and deepening of the ROP, but a variety of different patterns of progressive cRNFL loss. Thus, one should expect considerable variation in patterns of VF loss. Furthermore, conventional metrics (global or quadrant cRNFL thickness) do not fully depict the progressive changes that can be appreciated by inspecting OCT images.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of GlaucomaSame topicGlaucoma and retinal disordersFrench-language works237,207