NODULAR EPIRETINAL MÜLLER CELL GLIOSIS IN THE FOVEA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to report the findings of a hyperreflective nodular epiretinal gliosis observed with optical coherence tomography presumed to be due to subclinical hyaloidal traction causing Mϋller cell cone gliosis. METHODS: Retrospective, observational case series. RESULTS: Six eyes of six patients (mean age: 57 years, range 35-81 years) presented with a nodular epiretinal gliosis and had an average follow-up interval of 26 months (range 1-82 months). The mean baseline best-corrected visual acuity was 0.25 ± 0.17 (Snellen equivalent 20/38.3 ± 16.9). Fundus photography demonstrated a yellowish lesion overlying the fovea. Optical coherence tomography imaging revealed a hyperreflective preretinal lesion with a mean vertical length of 267 μ m (range 185-497) and a mean greatest linear diameter of 312 µ m (range 124-640). There was no vitreoretinal abnormality including vitreomacular traction or epiretinal membrane noted in any eye, and two of six eyes displayed a definitive posterior vitreous detachment. These nodules may have occurred before and persisted even after a posterior vitreous detachment or may have been acquired after the posterior vitreous detachment. The nodules typically remained stable with minimal change although in one eye, a posterior vitreous detachment occurred 6 months after initial presentation and lifted the gliosis off of the retinal surface where it remained attached to the posterior hyaloid. CONCLUSION: Foveal nodular epiretinal gliosis may occur due to subclinical hyaloidal traction on the Müller cell cone even without obvious vitreoretinal interface abnormality on optical coherence tomography.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".