Epidemiology of Pediatric Ocular Surface Inflammatory Diseases in the United States Using the Optum Labs Data Warehouse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To benchmark the epidemiologic features of pediatric ocular surface inflammatory diseases (POSID). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Patients 18 years of age or younger with a medical claim for a diagnosis of POSID in the Optum Labs Data Warehouse between 2007 and 2020. METHODS: Patients with claims of blepharokeratoconjunctivitis (BKC), herpes simplex keratoconjunctivitis (HSK), or vernal keratoconjunctivitis (VKC) were included. Those with less than 6 months of follow-up before the initial diagnosis of POSID were excluded. Odds ratios (ORs) were derived from multivariable logistic regression analyses evaluating the associations between epidemiologic variables and POSID development. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the estimated prevalence of POSID. Prevalence of POSID subtypes and changes in prevalence over time were also evaluated. RESULTS: Two thousand one hundred sixty-eight patients with POSID were identified from 2018 through 2019, yielding an estimated prevalence of 3.32 per 10 000. The prevalence of POSID was higher among children between 5 and 10 years of age, male children, those of Asian descent, and those living in the Northeast and the West census regions of the United States. The prevalence (per 10 000) of BKC, HSK, and VKC in the same period were 0.59 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-0.65), 0.74 (95% CI, 0.68-0.81), and 1.99 (95% CI, 1.88-2.10), respectively, and significant differences were found in terms of age, sex, racial, ethnic, and regional distributions among the diagnoses. Between 2008 through 2009 and 2018 through 2019, a significant increase in POSID was noted among Asians (from 6.26 [95% CI, 5.28-7.36] to 11.80 [95% CI, 10.40-13.34]) driven by changes in VKC. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that age older than 5 years (OR, 2.57-3.75; 95% CI, 2.17-4.34), male sex (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.26-1.50), Asian descent (OR, 3.12; 95% CI, 2.70-3.60), and Black or African American descent (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.02-1.55) were associated with POSID development. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides an estimated prevalence of POSID and its 3 common subtypes in the United States, with important epidemiologic differences among them. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".