MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3178759413 · doi:10.1097/wno.0000000000001306

Paracentral Acute Middle Maculopathy Associated With Anterior Ischemic Optic Neuropathy and Cilioretinal Artery Occlusion in Giant Cell Arteritis

2021· article· en· W3178759413 on OpenAlexaff
Michelle Kasimov, Marko M. Popovic, Jonathan A. Micieli

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuro-Ophthalmology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal and Optic Conditions
Canadian institutionsKensington Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGiant cell arteritisMedicineMaculopathyAnterior ischemic optic neuropathyOphthalmologyContext (archaeology)EdemaOptic discRetinalOptic nervePathologyRetinopathySurgeryVasculitisDiabetes mellitus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Paracentral acute middle maculopathy (PAMM) is a relatively new optical coherence tomography finding, defined by hyperreflectivity in the inner nuclear layer. In this article, we present a case of a 73-year-old woman who presented with transient vision loss followed by the sudden onset of complete vision loss to counting fingers at 1 foot for one day in the left eye. Dilated examination showed a right cotton wool spot, left pallid optic disc edema, and retinal edema in the distribution of the cilioretinal artery. OCT demonstrated hyperreflective band at the level of the inner nuclear layer, compatible with PAMM. Clinical and laboratory findings were consistent with GCA, for which she was prescribed high-dose oral prednisone, with confirmation of GCA on a subsequent temporal artery biopsy. PAMM may be seen in the context of GCA, and OCT of the macula serves as an important adjunct to define the retinal manifestations of this condition.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuro-OphthalmologySame topicRetinal and Optic ConditionsFrench-language works237,207