MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225471584 · doi:10.2147/opth.s360869

Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema with Aflibercept and Micropulse Laser (DAM Study)

2022· article· en· W4225471584 on OpenAlexafffund
Keyvan Koushan, Arshia Eshtiaghi, Pauline Fung, Alan R. Berger, David R. Chow

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical ophthalmology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersBayer Canada
KeywordsMedicineAfliberceptOphthalmologyDiabetic macular edemaVisual acuityPro re nataRandomized controlled trialMacular edemaLaser coagulationDiabetic retinopathyRanibizumabSurgeryBevacizumabDiabetes mellitusChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To investigate the safety and efficacy of micropulse (MP) macular laser in combination with intravitreal aflibercept for the treatment of center-involved diabetic macular edema (CI-DME). Methods: A single-blind prospective randomized controlled pilot trial was performed. In total, 30 eyes of 30 patients with CI-DME and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) between, and including, 20/30 and 20/400 were enrolled. Enrolled eyes were randomized to 2 groups. Group 1 received intravitreal aflibercept injections (IVT-AFL) with sham laser. Group 2 received IVT-AFL with MP laser. Both groups were followed every 4 weeks for 48 weeks and retreatment was performed on pro re nata basis according to preset criteria. The main outcome measure was the average number of intravitreal injections for each group at 48 weeks. Secondary outcome measures included changes in BCVA and central macular thickness (CMT) at 24 and 48 weeks. Results: The average number of intravitreal injections at 48 weeks was similar between the groups (8.5± 3.3 in Group 1 vs 7.9± 3.6 in Group 2, p=0.61). After 48 weeks, both groups demonstrated an improvement in BCVA and CMT. However, the difference in improvement between the groups was not statistically significant (p=0.18 for BCVA and p=0.57 for CMT). Conclusion: Intravitreal injections of aflibercept led to improvements in BCVA and CMT at 24 and 48 weeks. Addition of MP laser to eyes in group 2 did not offer additional benefit in reducing treatment burden or improving CMT. Eyes that received MP laser showed a numerically greater improvement in BCVA, although this was not statistically significant. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03143192 March 8, 2017. Keywords: anti-VEGF, diabetic macular edema, micropulse laser, visual acuity

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical ophthalmologySame topicRetinal Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207