MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3195703498 · doi:10.1002/dad2.12232

Retinal phenotyping of variants of Alzheimer's disease using ultra‐widefield retinal images

2021· article· en· W3195703498 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lajos Csincsik, Nicola Quinn, Keir Yong, Sebastian J. Crutch, Tünde Pető, Imre Lengyel

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia Diagnosis Assessment & Disease Monitoring · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilEconomic and Social Research CouncilMoorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation TrustQueen's UniversityQueen's University BelfastWolfson FoundationNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchBrain Research TrustAlimera Sciences
KeywordsRetinalDrusenOphthalmologyOdds ratioRetinaMedicineAlzheimer's diseaseNeurosciencePathologyDiseaseBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Posterior cortical atrophy (PCA) is the most common atypical variant of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Changes associated with PCA in the brain affect the visual cortex, but little is known about retinal changes in PCA. In this study, we explored retinal phenotypic variations in typical AD (tAD) and PCA. Methods Retinal phenotyping was carried out on ultra‐widefield (UWF) images of 69 control, 24 tAD, and 25 PCA participants. Results Individuals with tAD (odds ratio [OR] = 2.76 [confidence interval (CI):1.24 to 6.10], P = .012) and PCA (OR = 3.40 [CI:1.25 to 9.22], P = .016) were more likely phenotyped as hard drusen. tAD (OR = 0.34 [CI:0.12 to 0.92], P = .035) were less likely to have soft drusen compared to control. Almost 3‐fold increase in reticular pseudodrusen formation in tAD (OR = 2.93 [CI:1.10 to 7.76], P = .030) compared to control was estimated. Discussion Studying the peripheral retina may contribute to a better understanding of differences in retinal phenotypes of different AD variants.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia Diagnosis Assessment & Disease MonitoringSame topicRetinal Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207