MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396229933 · doi:10.1159/000538975

Patient Experience Survey Of Anti-VEGF Treatment for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration and Diabetic Macular Edema

2024· article· en· W4396229933 on OpenAlex

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmic Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersGenentech
KeywordsMedicineMacular degenerationDiabetic retinopathyOphthalmologyObservational studyAfliberceptPatient satisfactionBevacizumabInternal medicineSurgeryDiabetes mellitusChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Understanding patient perspectives of treatment may improve adherence and outcomes. This study explored real-world patient experiences with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) treatment for diabetic macular edema (DME) and neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). METHODS: This multinational, non-interventional, quantitative, cross-sectional, observational survey assessed treatment barriers/burden, patient-reported visual functioning, and treatment satisfaction in DME and nAMD patients in the USA, the UK, Canada, France, Italy, and Spain. Treatment patterns and visual outcomes were extracted from medical charts. Regression models evaluated relationships between adherence, total missed visits, number of anti-VEGF injections, and clinical and patient-reported outcomes for visual functioning. Association between treatment satisfaction and aspects of burden were assessed. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 183 DME and 391 nAMD patients. Patients had moderately high vision-related functioning (25-item National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire score: mean = 74.8) and were satisfied with their current treatment (mean total score: Macular Disease Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire = 59.2; Retinopathy Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire = 61.3). Treatment satisfaction scores were worse with higher time-related impacts of treatment (nAMD/DME), higher impacts on finances and daily life (nAMD), negative impacts on employment and lower expectations for treatment effectiveness (DME). Most patients reported ≥1 barrier (66.1% DME, 49.2% nAMD patients) related to treatment (35.0%), clinic (32.6%), and COVID-19 (21.1%). Moreover, 44.9% of patients reported some impairment in activities of daily living. Work absenteeism was observed among >60% of working patients. Nearly one-quarter (24.2%) of patients needed ≥1 day to recover from intravitreal injections; most reported ≥30 min of travel time (73.7%) and clinic wait time (54.2%). In unadjusted univariable analyses, treatment adherence (vs. nonadherence) was related to higher most recent visual acuity (β = 8.98 letters; CI, 1.34-16.62) and lower odds of visual acuity below driving vision (≤69 letters) (OR = 0.50; CI, 0.25-1.00). CONCLUSION: More durable treatments with reduced frequency of injections/visits may reduce treatment burden and improve patient satisfaction, which may enhance adherence and visual outcomes.

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 score0.329
Threshold uncertainty score0.558

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.312 · 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