MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408284897 · doi:10.1097/iae.0000000000004459

TRENDS IN CHOROIDAL VASCULARITY INDEX IN COGNITIVELY NORMAL INDIVIDUALS

2025· article· en· W4408284897 on OpenAlex
Camryn Thompson, Aaron Lindeke-Myers, Wufan Zhao, Joshua Woo, Sri Meghana Konda, Cason B. Robbins, Sandra S. Stinnett, Suzanna Joseph, Angela Hemesath, Anita Kundu, Ariana Allen, Rupesh Agrawal, Dilraj S. Grewal, Sharon Fekrat

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRetina · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOphthalmologyIntraocular pressureDiabetes mellitusRetinalVisual acuityVascularityInternal medicineSurgeryEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To establish a normative database of choroidal vascularity index (CVI) in cognitively normal adults. METHODS: Cognitively healthy volunteers who had a Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score of 23 or higher were included. Exclusion criteria included diabetes mellitus, uncontrolled hypertension, glaucoma, optic neuropathy, vitreoretinal disorders, intraocular surgery other than cataract or refractive, and visual acuity worse than 20/40. Enhanced depth optical coherence tomography images were taken. CVI was calculated from total choroidal area (TCA) and luminal area (LA). RESULTS: Overall average CVI was 67.0% ± 0.026%, mean TCA was 7.105 ± 4.618, and LA was 4.676 ± 2.843. There was no significant influence of sex on CVI (mean 66.9% females, 67.2% males, p-value 0.444). Age was not strongly associated with CVI with R-squared values all below 0.021. 504 eyes (89.4%) were from White participants, 43 from Black participants (7.50%), 6 from Asian participants, and 12 from other/unreported race. Race did not have a significant influence on mean CVI (67.1% White, 67.3% Black, 66.5% Asian, 64.0% other/not reported, p = 0.073). No statistically significant associations were identified between CVI and the presence of hypertension or cardiac disease. CONCLUSIONS: CVI is a durable metric across several demographic factors and presence of hypertension and/or cardiac disease. Following additional studies, CVI may be a useful biomarker for neurologic, retinal, and choroidal diseases.

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)0.000
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 score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.300 · 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