Impacts of delayed surgical intervention on postoperative visual acuity in patients with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims/Purpose: The referral pathway of patients with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) was examined to determine the effects of delayed surgical intervention. Visual outcomes of macula‐on and macula‐off RRD patients were compared based on duration to intervention. Methods: Retrospective cohort review of 90 cases with RRD repaired between January 2012 and July 2023. The probability of patients experiencing a decline in final visual acuity (VA) was assessed by stratifying them according to macular status and investigating how the time to an initial primary care visit, subsequent visit to a retina specialist, and surgical intervention impacted their final VA. Low vision was defined as VA of logMAR > 0.5. Results: The mean durations from symptom onset, primary care visit, and retina specialist visit to surgery were 8.8 days, 1.5 days, and 0.7 days, respectively. The average final VA was logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) 0.3 ± 0.08. With each additional day from the primary care visit to surgery, the odds of having logMAR > 0.5 increased by approximately 20% ( p = 0.042). Similarly, each day of delay between seeing a retina specialist visit to surgery, the odds of having logMAR > 0.5 increased by about 78% ( p = 0.005) and these patients were twice as likely to have macula‐off with each day of delay ( p = 0.036). Conclusions: Our study emphasizes the importance of timely access to primary care and timely specialist intervention for RRD. For each day of delay to a primary care visit and a retina specialist visit, the risk of postoperative low vision significantly increases. Moreover, each day of delay following the retina specialist visit doubles the risk of macular detachment.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".