Comparison of Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension Patients With and Without Anemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) is a condition of elevated intracranial pressure without an identifiable cause. It mostly affects young obese women but has been reported in individuals newly diagnosed with anemia or with chronic anemia. The relationship between anemia and IIH is not well elucidated. This study aims to characterize the course of IIH in anemic patients. METHODS: Consecutive patients with IIH were recruited from neuro-ophthalmology clinics. Subsequent retrospective chart review obtained information on symptoms, complete blood counts (CBCs), visual acuity, visual fields, and optic disc edema at baseline and follow-up. Anemia was diagnosed by hemoglobin <120 g/L (women) and <130 g/L (men). RESULTS: One hundred twenty-three patients with IIH were recruited for this study, and 22.8% (28/123) had anemia. More anemic individuals had mild-to-moderate visual acuity impairment (logarithm of minimum angle of resolution 0.3-1, P = 0.01) and worse automated mean deviation ( P = 0.048). The median follow-up time was 47.4 weeks (interquartile range:20.1-91.8). Fifteen of 28 patients with anemia received anemia treatment and showed a trend toward increased hemoglobin. At follow-up, there were no differences in the visual acuity, but patients with anemia had worse automated mean deviation on visual fields ( P = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS: IIH patients with anemia had worse visual function at presentation and worse final visual field parameters. This suggests that CBCs should be obtained for patients with papilledema because it may influence final visual outcome.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".