Diagnosis and histopathological evaluation of soft drusen in patients that underwent evisceration and enucleation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objectives: Drusen are yellow deposits between the basal lamina of the retinal pigment epithelium and the inner collagenous layer of Bruch’s membrane. Soft drusen, generally characterized by a medium to large size and poorly demarcated boundaries, increases the risk for advanced age-related macular degeneration (AMD). The prevalence of soft drusen in histopathological sections of the macular region, obtained from enucleated and eviscerated eyes, will be correlated in this study. Materials and Methods: This is a prospective cross-sectional study performed at the MUHC-McGill University Ocular Pathology and Translational Research Laboratory (McGill University, Montreal, Canada). A total of 158 eyes were evaluated between 2011 and 2019. Of these, 50% were enucleated and 50% eviscerated eyes. Cases were divided by age in decades into both groups, eviscerated and enucleated eyes. Inclusion criteria were patients aged 50 years or older, identification by histological criteria of macular area, histopathologically preserved macular area, presence of sufficient residual tissue for additional sections, and concrete patient data. The histopathological review was performed in digitized H and E slides (ZEISS Axio Scan.Z1) to assess the presence of soft drusen. Results: The results in both groups, enucleated and eviscerated eyes, were similar, as well as the histopathological criteria used in the analysis of soft drusen. Conclusion: Prevalence of AMD in the referred population was comparable to that described in both studied groups.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it