Ocular manifestations of Behçet's disease in children and adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Children and adults may develop Behçet's disease (BD), often with ocular involvement such as uveitis. This study aimed to determine the prevalence and type of ocular manifestations in childhood and adult BD. METHODS: Medline, Web of Science and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to October 5, 2018 to identify publications related to Behçet's disease comprising minimum twenty patients and providing the frequency of ocular manifestations (OC). Random effects models were used to combine the prevalence of OC in adults and children with BD. Heterogeneity was evaluated using I2. RESULTS: The search resulted in 3129 articles, of which 51 were included in meta-analysis. OCs were slightly more frequent in childhood onset BD with the mean [95% Confidence Interval] frequency of 45 [34-56%] compared to 36 [29-43%] in adults, however, this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.198). In both children and adults, posterior uveitis (children 27% vs. adults 25%, and retinal vasculitis in adults 16%) was the most common ocular manifestation, followed by anterior uveitis (children 18% vs. adults 23%). When comparing the distribution of OC in Behcet's in adults, there was geographic variation where OC were higher in Turkey and the Middle East 42%, followed by Europe and North America (36%), North Africa 26% and East Asia 25% but not significantly (p=0.27). CONCLUSIONS: Ocular manifestations, predominantly uveitis; are common in BD. Ocular manifestations are not proportionately more frequent in adults with BD along the ancient Silk Road.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.025 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".