MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392745030 · doi:10.1097/iae.0000000000004088

ADAPTIVE OPTICS IMAGING IN DIABETIC RETINOPATHY

2024· article· en· W4392745030 on OpenAlex
Michael Balas, Mariam Issa, Marko M. Popovic, Lana Moayad, Chris Zajner, Paola Oquendo Aponte, Hesham Hamli, Peng Yan, Tom Wright, Isabela M Melo, Rajeev H. Muni

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRetina · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Public HealthWestern UniversityPublic Health OntarioMcMaster UniversityKensington HealthUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiabetic retinopathyOphthalmologyMedicineRetinalLumen (anatomy)Prospective cohort studyRetinopathyGeeGeneralized estimating equationVisual acuityDiabetes mellitusInternal medicineMathematicsEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To investigate the correlation between diabetic retinopathy (DR) severity and microscopic retinal and vascular alterations using adaptive optics imaging. METHODS: In this single-center, prospective cohort study, adult participants with healthy eyes or DR underwent adaptive optics imaging. Participants were classified into control/mild nonproliferative DR, moderate/severe nonproliferative DR, and proliferative DR. Adaptive optics imaging using the RTX1 camera was obtained from 48 participants (87 eyes) for photoreceptor data and from 36 participants (62 eyes) for vascular data. RESULTS: Photoreceptor parameters significantly differed between DR groups at 2° and 4° of retinal eccentricity. Wall-to-lumen ratio varied significantly at 2° eccentricity, while other vascular parameters remained nonsignificant. Cone density and dispersion were the strongest predictors for DR severity ( P < 0.001) in multivariable generalized estimating equation modeling, while other vascular parameters remained nonsignificant between DR severity groups. All photoreceptor parameters showed significant correlations with visual acuity overall and across most DR severity groups. CONCLUSION: To date, this is one of the largest studies evaluating the use of adaptive optics imaging in DR. Adaptive optics imaging was demonstrated to differentiate between various levels of disease severity in DR. These results support the potential role in diagnostic and therapeutic microstructural evaluation in research and clinical practice.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.136
Threshold uncertainty score0.390

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.268 · 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