MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184124213 · doi:10.1016/j.xops.2021.100047

Comparing Retinal Structure in Patients with Achromatopsia and Blue Cone Monochromacy Using OCT

2021· article· en· W3184124213 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Emily J Patterson, Christopher S. Langlo, Michalis Georgiou, Angelos Kalitzeos, Mark E. Pennesi, Jay Neitz, Alison J. Hardcastle, Maureen Neitz, Michel Michaelides, Joseph Carroll

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmology Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Topicmelanin and skin pigmentation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesUCL Institute of Ophthalmology, University College LondonNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Institute of General Medical SciencesMedical Research CouncilMedical College of WisconsinNational Institutes of HealthFoundation Fighting BlindnessNational Eye InstituteWellcome TrustResearch to Prevent Blindness
KeywordsAchromatopsiaHypoplasiaFovealRetinalMedicineOphthalmologyOptical coherence tomographyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To compare foveal hypoplasia and the appearance of the ellipsoid zone (EZ) at the fovea in patients with genetically confirmed achromatopsia (ACHM) and blue cone monochromacy (BCM). Design: Retrospective, multi-center observational study. Subjects: Molecularly confirmed patients with ACHM (n = 89) and BCM (n = 33). Methods: We analyzed high-resolution spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) images of the macula from aforementioned patients with BCM. Three observers independently graded SD-OCT images for foveal hypoplasia (i.e. retention of one or more inner retinal layers at the fovea) and four observers judged the integrity of the EZ at the fovea, based on an established grading scheme. These measures were compared with previously published data from the ACHM patients. Main Outcome Measures: Presence of foveal hypoplasia and EZ grade. Results: Foveal hypoplasia was significantly more prevalent in ACHM than in BCM (p<0.001). In addition, we observed a significant difference in the distribution of EZ grades between ACHM and BCM, with grade II EZ being by far the most common phenotype in BCM (61% of patients). In contrast, ACHM patients had a relatively equal prevalence of EZ grades I, II, and IV. Interestingly, grade IV EZ was 2.6 times more prevalent in ACHM compared to BCM, while grade V EZ (macular atrophy) was present in 3% of both the ACHM and BCM cohorts. Conclusions: The higher incidence of foveal hypoplasia in ACHM than BCM supports a role for cone activity in foveal development. Although there are differences in EZ grades between these conditions, the degree of overlap suggests EZ grade is not sufficient for definitive diagnosis, in contrast to previous reports. Analysis of additional OCT features in similar cohorts may reveal differences with greater diagnostic value. Finally, the extent to which foveal hypoplasia or EZ grade is prognostic for therapeutic potential in either group remains to be seen, but motivates further study.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.276
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOphthalmology ScienceSame topicmelanin and skin pigmentationFrench-language works237,207