Reliability of confocal corneal microscopy for measurement of dendritic cell density in suspected small fiber neuropathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION/AIMS: Dendritic cells (DCs) and their contacts with corneal nerves are described in animal models of nerve damage. Dendritic cell density (DCD) is a potential marker of immune activity in suspected small-fiber neuropathy (SFN). Here, we aim to evaluate the intra- and inter-rater reliability of DCD measurements in suspected SFN. METHODS: This retrospective study collected DCD from confocal microscopy images from the corneal sub-basal epithelium of the eye from 48 patients (mean age 49.6 ± 12.1 y, 61% female). Two examiners, each blinded to the other's examinations and measurements, assessed DCD to evaluate inter-rater reliability. For intra-rater reliability, the first examiner performed a second measurement after 14 days. DCs were classified into two cell morphological subtypes: mature and immature. RESULTS: Test-retest reliability for total DCD showed excellent agreement, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.96 and inter-rater reliability intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.77. The immature cell subtype showed excellent intra-rater reliability but lower inter-rater reliability. DISCUSSION: We found that DCD measurements in the corneal sub-basal epithelium are sufficiently reliable for consideration in clinical studies of patients with suspected SFN.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".