MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4377224612 · doi:10.2196/preprints.49188

The Toronto Tele-Retinal Screening Program for the Elderly in Long-Term Care: A Pilot Project (Preprint)

2023· preprint· en· W4377224612 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michelle H. Lim, Tina Felfeli, Winnie Mangubat, Hamid Moghimi, Michael Grinton, Michael H. Brent

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiabetic retinopathyMacular degenerationGlaucomaPopulationCohortTelemedicineDiabetes mellitusOptometryGerontologyOphthalmologyHealth careInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND Mobility challenges, transportation, and finances may serve as barriers to diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening in the growing elderly population in Ontario. Screening of patients in their own nursing homes using teleophthalmology may improve accessibility to DR screening. OBJECTIVE To report the feasibility, results, and patient satisfaction of a pilot expansion of the Toronto Tele-Retinal Screening Program in an elderly long-term care home. METHODS A pilot project was initiated with a cohort of elderly patients with Type II diabetes mellitus (DM) in long-term care who were referred to the Toronto Tele-Retinal Screening Program for DR screening between April 1, 2022 and July 1, 2022. RESULTS A total of 28 patients were screened for DR. Half (14/28) of patients suffered from a fall within the last year and 35% (10/28) were fully dependent for mobility. Overall, 14.3% (4/28) of patients could not be successfully imaged. Of the patients imaged, 8.3% (2/24) were advised to arrange an urgent follow-up. Pathologies identified included uncontrolled glaucoma (4.1%, 1/24), non-proliferative DR (NPDR) (8.3%, 2/24), wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD) (8.3%, 2/24), and dry AMD (37.5%, 9/24). A total of 20.8% (5/24) patients could not undergo tabletop imaging due to mobility issues. Screening of 60% (3/5) of these patients were successful with the handheld camera. Overall, 90% (17/19) of patients rated their subjective screening experience as either “brilliant” or “really good.” CONCLUSIONS This pilot project demonstrated that the implementation of the Toronto Tele-Retinal Screening Program into elderly long-term care homes may mitigate common barriers to eye screening with a good subjective patient experience.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Observationalhigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.582
Threshold uncertainty score0.830

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.323 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRetinal Diseases and Treatments→French-language works237,207→