MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158270162 · doi:10.4103/jomt.jomt_58_20

Pattern of presentation and visual outcome of glaucoma in a tertiary hospital, Makurdi, Nigeria

2021· article· en· W3158270162 on OpenAlexaff
KN Malu, AV Ramyil, D Malu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medicine in the Tropics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePresentation (obstetrics)OptometryTertiary levelGlaucomaOphthalmologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: About 15% of blindness in Africa is due to glaucoma. The Nigerian National Blindness and Visual Impairment Survey found that glaucoma accounted for 16.7% of blindness with regional variations. The purpose of the study was to find the regional pattern of presentation and visual outcome to implement preventive measures. Methods: This was a descriptive retrospective study of new patients who presented to the eye clinic of Benue State University Teaching Hospital, Makurdi and were diagnosed of glaucoma. Results: In this study, 795 consecutive new patients who fulfilled the diagnostic criteria for glaucoma were included. Their mean age was 45.5 ± 18.3. There were 450 (56.6%) males. More patients presented in the fourth and fifth decade of life ( n = 299, 37.6%). Primary open-angle glaucoma (inclusive of juvenile open-angle glaucoma, n =595, 74.8%, and normal tension glaucoma, n = 8, 1.0%) accounted for a total of 603 (75.8%). There were 145 (18.2%) glaucoma suspects, 23 (2.9%) primary angle-closure glaucoma, 20 (2.5%) secondary glaucoma, and four cases of congenital glaucoma. Vertical cup-to-disc ratio of ≥0.9 was in 634 (39.9%) of eyes; 274 (34.4%) were bilateral, and were all considered to have severe, advanced or end-stage glaucoma. About 203 (25.5%) had discs asymmetry of ≥0.2. About 355 (22.3%) patients’ eyes were blind: 95 (11.9%) bilateral and 165 (20.8%) uniocular. Conclusion: Open-angle glaucoma was most common, and patients presented at a young age with severe eye disease, visual impairment, and blindness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medicine in the TropicsSame topicGlaucoma and retinal disordersFrench-language works237,207