MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389127245 · doi:10.3928/01913913-20230906-02

Spontaneous Late Visual Recovery in Pediatric Central Retinal Artery Occlusion: A Case Report and Literature Review

2023· review· en· W4389127245 on OpenAlexaff
Niveditha Pattathil, Manpartap Bal, Christine Law

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Ophthalmology & Strabismus · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal and Optic Conditions
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCentral retinal artery occlusionStrabismusVisual acuityPresentation (obstetrics)Retinopathy of prematurityPediatricsSurgeryOphthalmologyGestational age

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors report a rare case of pediatric central retinal artery occlusion (CRAO) and spontaneous late recovery, with associated literature review. A retrospective review of patient medical records and literature search of four relevant databases was conducted. A 7-year-old girl with sudden, painless loss of vision in her right eye was referred to the authors' center where she was found to have a CRAO with hand motion visual acuity. One month later, the patient developed multiple retinal hemorrhages throughout the fundus. Despite undergoing extensive investigations, a cause for her condition was not determined. Seventeen months after the original event, the patient regained a visual acuity of 20/40. A CRAO in the pediatric population is relatively rare and requires extensive investigation into the potential cause. Compared to adult CRAO, presentation in the pediatric age group should warrant a high index of suspicion and extensive work-up to treat any underlying systemic conditions and possibly prevent involvement of the other eye. [ J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus . 2023;60(6):e70–e74.]

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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric Ophthalmology & StrabismusSame topicRetinal and Optic ConditionsFrench-language works237,207