MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400691676 · doi:10.1186/s12886-024-03559-7

Pneumatic retinopexy for primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment: from a clinical trial to the real-life experience

2024· article· en· W4400691676 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Ophthalmology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal and Macular Surgery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVitrectomyPars planaRetinal detachmentVisual acuityOphthalmologyRandomized controlled trialClinical trialSurgeryRetinalInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: To report real-world outcomes of patients with primary Reghmatogenous Retinal Detachment (RRD) treated with Pneumatic Retinopexy (PnR) according to the indications of the Pneumatic Retinopexy versus Vitrectomy for management of Primary Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment Outcomes Randomized Trial (PIVOT) trial. METHODS: Multicenter, retrospective study. Patients treated with PnR for RRD between 2021 and 2023 and a follow-up of at least 6 months were included. Single-procedure anatomical success, final anatomical success, complications, causes of failures, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) after surgery, and the vision-related quality of life using the 25-Item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25) were reported. RESULTS: A total of 76 eyes of 76 patients were included. Mean age was 60 ± 8.1 years. Primary anatomic reattachment was achieved by 84.3% of patients and final anatomical reattachment after pars plana vitrectomy was obtained in 100% of patients. BCVA improved from 0.32 (20/40) to 0.04 (20/20) logMar (p < 0.001) at 6 months. The main cause of failure was related to the presence of additional (likely missed) retinal breaks (66.6% of cases). Also, primary PnR failure was more frequent in eyes of patients with older age, macular involvement, worse baseline BCVA, greater extent of the RRD, and increased duration from diagnosis to treatment. Overall, the mean NEI-VFQ 25 composite score was 93.9% ± 6.4 at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: The criteria of the PIVOT trial can be applied to real-world scenarios in the decision-making process for the treatment of primary RRD, with excellent anatomical and functional 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.322
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.286 · 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