MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292779681

Retinal Prosthesis System for Advanced Retinitis Pigmentosa: A Health Technology Assessment.

2016· article· en· W4292779681 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRetinitis pigmentosaVisual prosthesisArgusRetinal implantMedicinePsychologyOphthalmologyRetinalComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Retinitis pigmentosa is a group of genetic disorders that involves the breakdown and loss of photoreceptors in the retina, resulting in progressive retinal degeneration and eventual blindness. The Argus II Retinal Prosthesis System is the only currently available surgical implantable device approved by Health Canada. It has been shown to improve visual function in patients with severe visual loss from advanced retinitis pigmentosa. The objective of this analysis was to examine the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, budget impact, and safety of the Argus II system in improving visual function, as well as exploring patient experiences with the system. METHODS: We performed a systematic search of the literature for studies examining the effects of the Argus II retinal prosthesis system in patients with advanced retinitis pigmentosa, and appraised the evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria, focusing on visual function, functional outcomes, quality of life, and adverse events. We developed a Markov decision-analytic model to assess the cost-effectiveness of the Argus II system compared with standard care over a 10-year time horizon. We also conducted a 5-year budget impact analysis. We used a qualitative design and an interview methodology to examine patients' lived experience, and we used a modified grounded theory methodology to analyze information from interviews. Transcripts were coded, and themes were compared against one another. RESULTS: One multicentre international study and one single-centre study were included in the clinical review. In both studies, patients showed improved visual function with the Argus II system. However, the sight-threatening surgical complication rate was substantial. In the base-case analysis, the Argus II system was cost-effective compared with standard care only if willingness-to-pay was more than $207,616 per quality-adjusted life-year. The 5-year budget impact of funding the Argus II system ranged from $800,404 to $837,596. Retinitis pigmentosa significantly affects people's ability to navigate physical and virtual environments. Argus II was described as enabling the fundamental elements of sight. As such, it had a positive impact on quality of life for people with retinitis pigmentosa. CONCLUSIONS: Based on evidence of moderate quality, patients with advanced retinitis pigmentosa who were implanted with the Argus II retinal prosthesis system showed significant improvement in visual function, real-life functional outcomes, and quality of life, but there were complications associated with the surgery that could be managed through standard ophthalmologic treatments. The costs for the technology are high.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.319
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207