Interventional Management Of Neuropathic Ocular Pain – A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neuropathic Ocular Pain (NOP) is a debilitating and refractory pain condition. This scoping review is the first to summarize the current evidence of efficacy of interventional treatment options for NOP. Databases were searched for studies published up to March 31, 2023. Two reviewers screened and extracted data, and performed the risk of bias analysis. Twelve studies were included, consisting of 4 cohort studies and 8 case series/reports, with a total of 87 patients. Eight interventions were defined: stellate ganglion block (n=1), trigeminal nerve blocks (n=3), retrobulbar block (n=1), pulsed radiofrequency of sphenopalatine ganglion (n=1), Onabotulinum-Toxin A(n=1), trigeminal nerve stimulation (n=1), intrathecal drug delivery (n=1) and transcutaneous electrical trigeminal nerve stimulation (n=3). Procedures were found to be safe and demonstrated analgesic effect. Follow-up ranged from 24h to 12 months. Substantial heterogeneity across studies was found, and quality was deemed low and of moderate risk of bias. High-quality studies are urgently needed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".