The Association between the Pulsatile Choroidal Volume Change and Ocular Rigidity
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To assess the relationship between the pulsatile choroidal volume change (ΔV) and ocular rigidity (OR), an important biomechanical property of the eye. Design: This is a prospective cross-sectional study. Subjects: Two hundred seventeen participants (235 eyes) were included in this study. Of those, 18 eyes (18 participants) had exudative retinal disease, and 217 eyes (199 participants) had open-angle glaucoma (39.2%), suspect discs (12.4%), ocular hypertension (14.3%), or healthy eyes (34.1%). Methods: Pulsatile choroidal volume change was measured using dynamic OCT, which detects the change in choroidal thickness during the cardiac cycle. Ocular rigidity was measured using an invasive procedure as well as using a validated optical method. Correlations between ΔV and OR were assessed in subjects with healthy eyes, eyes with glaucoma, or eyes with exudative retinal disease. Main Outcome Measures: Ocular rigidity and pulsatile ocular volume change. Results: ≥ 0.05). Mean ΔV was 7.3 ± 3.4 μL for all groups combined with a range of 3.0 to 20.8 μL. Conclusions: These results suggest an association between the biomechanics of the corneoscleral shell and pulsatile ocular blood flow, which may indicate that a more rigid eye exerts more resistance to pulsatile choroidal expansion. This highlights the dynamic nature of both blood flow and biomechanics in the eye, as well as how they may interact, leading to a greater understanding of the pathophysiology of ocular disease. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it