MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409286575 · doi:10.1101/2025.04.07.25325069

Ocular Manifestations in a Cohort of Patients with Mpox in the Democratic Republic of the Congo 2007 - 2011

2025· preprint· en· W4409286575 on OpenAlexaff
Mbala-Kingebeni Placide, Nam V. Nguyen, Jean-Claude Mwanza, Jessica Carag, Susanne L. Linderman, Tolulope Fashina, Eddy Kinganda-Lusamaki, Tony Wawina-Bokalanga, Amuri Aziza, Jean-Claude Makangara-Cigolo, Emmanuel V Hasivirwe Vakaniaki, Yvon Anta, Jepsy Yango, Olivier Tshiani, Jason Kindrachuk, Laurens Liesenborghs, Martine Peeters, Éric Delaporte, Anne W. Rimoin, John W. Huggins, Therese Riu-Rovira, Steve Ahuka, James W. Martin, Ian Crozier, Steven Yeh, Jean-Jacques Tamfum Muyembe

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPoxvirus research and outbreaks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersDefense Threat Reduction AgencyNational Institutes of HealthU.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsMedicineEyelidCohortKeratitisDermatologyOphthalmologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report describes the ocular manifestations in a cohort of patients with Clade I mpox evaluated in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) from 2007 to 2011, as well as the clinical course of a pediatric patient with mpox associated with ocular disease. Among 216 patients, ocular manifestations were observed in 8.3% of the patients, including conjunctivitis, eyelid lesions, eyelid swelling, eye pain, orbital swelling, keratitis, and corneal staphyloma. These findings highlight the broad spectrum of ocular manifestations with potential sight-threatening consequences in patients with mpox.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicPoxvirus research and outbreaksFrench-language works237,207