MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229059707 · doi:10.5935/0004-2749.20230073

Scleral communication between Glaucoma drainage device capsule and the suprachoroidal space simulating amelanotic choroidal melanoma

2022· letter· en· W4229059707 on OpenAlexaff
Diego Queiroz, Gustavo Porto Lustosa, Diego Mascato, Melina Correia Morales, Arthur Gustavo Fernandes, Rodrigo Brant

Bibliographic record

VenueArquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia · 2022
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsOttawa Public Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPars planaVitrectomyMedicineOphthalmologyVisual acuityRetinal detachmentUltrasound biomicroscopyChoroidSurgeryGlaucomaRetinalRetina

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a case report involving a 56-year-old male patient with a history of pars plana vitrectomy due to a rhegmatogenous retinal detachment in the right eye that resulted in the implantation of a drainage device after the patient developed secondary glaucoma. Two years after the device's implantation, the patient was referred to our care as his visual acuity had decreased to 20/200 (1.00 LogMAR). At the fundus evaluation, a choroidal amelanotic elevation was observed at the upper temporal equator, and a potential diagnosis was made of amelanotic choroidal melanoma. The ultrasound exam visualized the patient's implanted superotemporal justabulbar drainage device, which revealed a transscleral communication from the plate fibrocapsular's draining space to the suprachoroidal space (fistula). The ultrasound also revealed a focal pocket of choroidal detachment in the patient's superotemporal region, simulating an amelanotic choroidal melanoma. A new pars plana vitrectomy was performed to remove the internal limiting membrane without repercussions at the fistula site. The patient's recovery progressed well, and he regained a visual acuity of 20/70 (0.55 LogMAR). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case report of this condition.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.005
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArquivos Brasileiros de OftalmologiaSame topicGlaucoma and retinal disordersFrench-language works237,207