MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226096771 · doi:10.1097/wno.0000000000001550

An Exploratory Study to Investigate the Utility of Clinical Screening for Neurodegenerative Disease in Age-Related Eye Disease Research

2022· article· en· W4226096771 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Victoria S. Pelak, Yosbelkys Martin Paez, Jennifer L. Patnaik, Samantha K. Holden, Prem S. Subramanian, Naresh Mandava, Anne M. Lynch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuro-Ophthalmology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
KeywordsMedicineMontreal Cognitive AssessmentNerve fiber layerMacular degenerationOphthalmologyCohortDiseaseRetinalAudiologyInternal medicineCognitive impairment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Unrecognized neurodegenerative diseases (NDD) in age-related eye disease research studies have the potential to confound vision-specific quality of life and retinal optical coherence tomography (OCT) outcome measures. The aim of this exploratory study was to investigate relationships between NDD screening tools and visual outcome measures in a small cohort of controls from the Colorado Age-Related Macular Degeneration Registry (CO-AMD), to consider the utility of future studies. Methods: Twenty-nine controls from the CO-AMD were screened using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), a Colorado Parkinsonian Checklist, and the Lewy Body Composite Risk Score. Univariate and multivariable linear regression modeling was used to assess associations between screening tools and the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25 (VFQ-25) and macular OCT outcome measures, and t tests were used to evaluate outcome measure differences between those with normal vs abnormal MoCA scores. Results: One patient withdrew. The average age was 72.8 years, and 68% were female patients. Ten participants (36%) had abnormal MoCA scores, and their VFQ-25 scores were only 1 point less and not statistically different than those with normal MoCA scores. Macular OCT volumes and thicknesses for retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) and retinal ganglion cell layer were consistently and moderately lower for those with abnormal MoCA scores, and a positive association between MoCA and macular RNFL volume was observed, although differences and regression were not significant. Parkinson screening tests were abnormal for only 4 participants and were not associated with OCT or VFQ-25 measures by regression modeling. Conclusions: Given the degree and direction of observed differences, further investigation is warranted regarding the relationship between cognitive screening tools and macular OCT measures in age-related eye disease research, but future investigations regarding the relationship between NDD screening tools and VFQ-25 seem unwarranted.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.689

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.278
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.225 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuro-OphthalmologySame topicRetinal Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207