MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391402539 · doi:10.1177/02537176231223311

Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness in Patients with Schizophrenia and Its Relation with Cognitive Impairment

2024· article· en· W4391402539 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anu Padmanabhan, Padma B Prabhu, Varsha Vidyadharan, Harish M Tharayil

Bibliographic record

VenueIndian Journal of Psychological Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNerve fiber layerRetinalSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Cognitive impairmentCognitionRelation (database)NeuroscienceLayer (electronics)PsychologyOphthalmologyCognitive psychologyMedicineMaterials sciencePsychiatryComputer scienceComposite materialData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Schizophrenia is a chronic severe mental illness with heterogeneous clinical presentation, course, and outcome. Cognitive impairment is one of its core features. Retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) imaging using OCT (optical coherence tomography) could provide easy access for in vivo imaging of the retina, rendering it as a “window to the brain.” Studies done on schizophrenia have shown RNFL thinning. This study attempts to look into the association between cognitive impairment, disease duration, and RNFL abnormality in patients with schizophrenia using OCT. Methods: Patients diagnosed with schizophrenia meeting DSM 5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) criteria and who were confirmed to be in remission for at least six months clinically and scoring less than three on PANSS-8 (positive and negative symptom scale-8) remission scale were included. They were administered the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale (MoCA) for cognitive assessment. RNFL measures were taken using spectral domain-OCT. Variables were compared using Pearson’s correlation test, one-way ANOVA test, and independent t-test as appropriate. Results: A total of 36 patients were studied. MoCA scores and RNFL thickness showed a positive correlation. Patients with schizophrenia had reduced average RNFL thickness and reduced RNFL thickness in superior, inferior, and temporal quadrants. Average RNFL thickness, Superior and inferior quadrant RNFL thickness showed a positive correlation with MoCA scores. No correlation was obtained between macular volume, macular thickness, duration of illness, and MoCA scores. Conclusion: Patients with schizophrenia have reduced average RNFL thickness. Patients with low MoCA scores have RNFL thinning.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndian Journal of Psychological MedicineSame topicGlaucoma and retinal disordersFrench-language works237,207