MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389485674 · doi:10.2147/opth.s435252

Evaluation of Foveal Avascular Zone After Strabismic and Anisometropic Amblyopia Therapy in Saudi Children Using Optic Coherence Tomography Angiography: A Cohort Study

2023· article· en· W4389485674 on OpenAlexaff
Gorka Sesma, Tasnim Al Mairi, Heba Khashoggi, Shorog AlDhahi, Fahad Aljohar, Rajiv Khandekar, Abdulaziz Awad

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical ophthalmology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOphthalmologyOptical coherence tomography angiographyFoveal avascular zonePerimeterFovealOptical coherence tomographyCohortVisual acuityStrabismusSnellen chartAnisometropiaRetinalOptometryRefractive errorInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) noninvasively images retinal microvasculature. Foveal avascular zone (FAZ) biomarkers can act as indicators of various forms of amblyopia, making them valuable tools for clinicians. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of amblyopia therapy on the FAZ using OCTA to determine FAZ size in children with untreated amblyopia. Patients and Methods: This two-arm cohort study enrolled 23 children with untreated strabismic or anisometropic amblyopia who underwent OCTA between 2021– 2022. Each arm had 23 eyes, with one arm having amblyopic eyes and the other having normal eyes. FAZ area, perimeter, and circularity index were measured before and quarterly during 1 year of occlusion therapy. Differences in avascular zone biomarkers between amblyopic and fellow eyes were compared and linked to demographic and ocular factors. Results: Similar FAZ areas were found in the amblyopic (0.3 mm 2 ) and nonamblyopic eyes (0.28 mm 2 ) (P = 0.83), with no significant change in either group (P = 0.93). Amblyopic eyes showed a larger FAZ perimeter reduction (0.12 mm 2 ) than fellow eyes (0.02 mm 2 ), but the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.09). The circularity index in amblyopic eyes matched with fellow eyes (0.67 mm 2 ), P = 0.38. Initial visual acuity and strabismus correlated with changes in the follow-up FAZ area. Conclusion: Amblyopia treatment did not significantly alter FAZ area in this cohort. Perimeter variations between amblyopic and fellow eyes require further study. The conclusions were limited by the sample size and lack of randomization. Plain Language Summary: Amblyopia is a common vision problem in children in which one eye does not see the fellow eye. This can occur if the eyes are not lined up right or if their prescriptions are different. Amblyopia is treated by placing a patch over the stronger eye to help the weaker eye better see. Researchers have used a technique called optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) to compare the foveal avascular zone (FAZ) before and after treatment in children with amblyopia. The FAZ is a spot on the back of the eye where there are no blood vessels or light-sensitive cells. Changes in the FAZ may indicate the severity of amblyopia. The study included 23 children with untreated amblyopia. Over the course of more than a year, measurements of FAZ area, perimeter, and roundness were taken before and during occlusion therapy. The size of the FAZ was also compared between the eyes with and without amblyopia. At the start of the study and after treatment, there were no significant differences between the FAZs of amblyopic eyes and other eyes. There were some differences in the size of the FAZ between eyes. Changes in the FAZ area were linked to the initial state of vision and misalignment. Overall, this study found that occlusion therapy did not change FAZ area in children with amblyopia. More research is needed to determine why the FAZ perimeter can differ between the eyes. Larger randomized studies would provide more information about how the FAZ changes when treating amblyopia. Keywords: amblyopia, optical coherence tomography angiography, foveal avascular zone, occlusion therapy, biomarkers

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.921

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical ophthalmologySame topicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesFrench-language works237,207