MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400733728 · doi:10.3390/biomedicines12071579

The Role of Reactive Oxygen Species in Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Comprehensive Review of Antioxidant Therapies

2024· review· en· W4400733728 on OpenAlexaff
Merve Kulbay, Kevin Y. Wu, Gurleen K. Nirwal, Paul Bélanger, Simon D. Tran

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedicines · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReactive oxygen speciesMacular degenerationAntioxidantDegeneration (medical)MedicineBioinformaticsChemistryBiologyOphthalmologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review article delves into the intricate roles of reactive oxygen species (ROS) in the pathogenesis of age-related macular degeneration (AMD). It presents a detailed analysis of the oxidative stress mechanisms that contribute to the development and progression of these diseases. The review systematically explores the dual nature of ROS in ocular physiology and pathology, underscoring their essential roles in cellular signaling and detrimental effects when in excess. In the context of AMD, the focus is on the oxidative impairment in the retinal pigment epithelium and Bruch's membrane, culminating in the deterioration of macular health. Central to this review is the evaluation of various antioxidant strategies in the prevention and management of AMD. It encompasses a wide spectrum of antioxidants, ranging from dietary nutrients like vitamins C and E, lutein, and zeaxanthin to pharmacological agents with antioxidative properties. The review also addresses novel therapeutic approaches, including gene therapy and nanotechnology-based delivery systems, aiming to enhance antioxidant defense mechanisms in ocular tissues. The article concludes by synthesizing current research findings, clinical trial data, and meta-analyses to provide evidence-based recommendations. It underscores the need for further research to optimize antioxidant therapies, considering individual patient factors and disease stages. This comprehensive review thus serves as a valuable resource for clinicians, researchers, and healthcare professionals in ophthalmology, offering insights into the potential of antioxidants in mitigating the burden of AMD.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.760
Threshold uncertainty score0.657

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomedicinesSame topicRetinal Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207