MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381149570 · doi:10.1186/s40942-023-00471-y

Evaluation of visual acuity in dry AMD patients after microcurrent electrical stimulation

2023· article· en· W4381149570 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin M. Parkinson, Eric C. Sayre, Sheldon W. Tobe

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Retina and Vitreous · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreCoquitlam College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialVisual acuityMacular degenerationOphthalmologyRepeated measures designAnalysis of varianceQuality of life (healthcare)Prospective cohort studySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: To assess micro current to improve vision for dry age-related macular degeneration. Dry age-related macular degeneration is a major cause of blindness, disability, and severe erosion of quality of life, throughout the world. Beyond nutritional supplementation, there is no approved therapy. METHODS: This was a prospective randomized sham controlled clinical trial for participants with confirmed dry AMD with documented visual loss. Participants were randomized three to one, to receive transpalpebral external micro current electrical stimulation with the MacuMira device. The Treatment group received four treatments in the first two weeks, and two further treatments at weeks 14 and 26. Differences in BCVA and contrast sensitivity (CS) were estimated with mixed-effects repeated measures analysis of variance. RESULTS: Change of visual acuity with ETDRS assessment of number of letters read (NLR) and contrast sensitivity at week 4 and 30, compared to the first visit, between 43 treatment and 19 sham control participants. The Sham Control group had NLR of 24.2 (SD 7.1) at baseline, 24.2 (SD 7.2) at 4 weeks, and 22.1 (SD7.4) at 30 weeks. The Treatment group had NLR of 19.6 (SD 8.9) at baseline, 27.6 (SD 9.1) at 4 weeks, and 27.8 (SD 8.4) at 30 weeks. The change in NLR from baseline in the Treatment compared to the Sham control group was 7.7 (95% CI 5.7, 9.7, p < 0.001) at 4 weeks and 10.4 (95% CI 7.8, 13.1, p < 0.001) at 30 weeks. There were similar benefits in CS. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study of transpalpebral microcurrent demonstrated improved visual measures and is very encouraging as a potential treatment for dry AMD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02540148, ClinicalTrials.gov.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.497
Threshold uncertainty score0.232

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Retina and VitreousSame topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207