MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384830662 · doi:10.2147/opth.s401262

Association Between Vitamin Deficiencies and Ophthalmological Conditions

2023· review· en· W4384830662 on OpenAlexaff
Austin Pereira, R Damilola Adekunle, Michele Zaman, Michael J. Wan

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical ophthalmology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicVitamin C and Antioxidants Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVitamin A deficiencyVitaminVitamin D and neurologyEpidemiologyXerophthalmiaVitamin B12PediatricsPhysiologyDermatologyIntensive care medicineOphthalmologyRetinolPathologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vitamin deficiencies can have adverse effects on health, including on the visual system. The ocular manifestations of a vitamin deficiency are related to the underlying biochemical function of the particular nutrient. While vitamin deficiencies are not common in developed counties, they are still prevalent in parts of the developing world and in specific, vulnerable populations. Vitamin deficiencies can cause or contribute to many ophthalmological conditions and eye diseases may even be the first presenting finding of a vitamin deficiency. As such, it is important for ophthalmologists to be aware of the ocular manifestations of vitamin deficiencies, especially given that the complications can be severe and effectively treated if identified early. This review summarizes the literature on the main vitamins known to have characteristic ocular manifestations: vitamins A, B1, B2, B9, B12, C, D, E and K. The function, epidemiology, manifestations, workup, and management of each vitamin is discussed in detail.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.341
GPT teacher head0.532
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations20
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical ophthalmologySame topicVitamin C and Antioxidants ResearchFrench-language works237,207