MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159018353 · doi:10.1177/11206721211013653

Correlation of sectoral choroidal vascularity with angiographic leakage in central serous chorioretinopathy

2021· article· en· W3159018353 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

VenueEuropean Journal of Ophthalmology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVascularitySerous fluidOphthalmologyChoroidDiabetic retinopathyNuclear medicineRadiologyDiabetes mellitusRetinaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To correlate sectoral choroidal vascularity with angiographic leakage in eyes with central serous chorioretinopathy (CSCR). Methods: This was a retrospective, cross-sectional study including patients with active CSCR. Multimodal imaging including fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) were performed to identify leakage site and obtain choroidal measurements, respectively. An automated algorithm was used to perform shadow compensation, choroidal boundary localization and binarization, three (3-D) dimensional mapping, and early treatment of diabetic retinopathy study (ETDRS) grid based choroidal quantification that is, choroidal thickness (CT) and choroidal vascularity index (CVI). Nested analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed to compare CT and CVI in different sectors. Results: Thirty-two eyes with active CSCR were analyzed. CT values varied significantly among the sectors (range, 450.27–482.63 µm; p = 0.005) and rings (range, 459.71–480.45 µm; p < 0.001), however, CVI failed to show significant variation among various segments (sectors, rings, and quadrants; range, 0.53–0.54; all p values > 0.05). Among 25 leaking spots in 25 different sectors, 12 (48%) had an increased CT compared to the overall CT whereas only 24% had increased CVI compared to overall CVI. Mean CT and CVI of the sectors with leakage (427.1 ± 81.1 µm; 0.51 ± 0.05) and remaining sectors without leakage (411.3 ± 73.9 µm; 0.53 ± 0.04) were not statistically different ( p = 0.48; p = 0.12, respectively). Conclusion: Though CT varied in different segments and increased CT corresponded to leakage points on FFA in 48% of eyes, CVI changes were more diffusely spread and local changes in CVI were not predictive of leakage location in eyes with active CSCR.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.239 · 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