Implementation of pneumatic retinopexy in the Japanese population
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 propose an implementation model for pneumatic retinopexy (PnR) in a region where PnR is performed infrequently, and to assess its impact on treatment of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series. METHODS: We reviewed 222 consecutive eyes with primary RRD treated from July 2017 to September 2023 at a tertiary care center in Japan. The treatment methods utilized included pars plana vitrectomy (PPV), scleral buckling (SB) and PnR. The surgeon learned PnR through social media. Primary anatomic reattachment rate (PARR) and visual acuity outcomes were compared between the pre-PnR (prior to the implementation; 110 eyes) and post-PnR (after the implementation; 112 eyes) periods, as well as between PnR and PPV in the post-PnR period. PARR for PnR was also evaluated based on RRD characteristics and gas injection frequency. RESULTS: In the post-PnR period PnR was performed in 53.6% (60/112)of cases. The PARR was similar in the pre-PnR (97.3%) and post-PnR (93.8%) periods (P=.33). Visual outcomes were similar both across periods and between PnR and PPV at 3, 6 and 12 month post-operatively. The PARR for PnR was 88.3% overall, 90.5% in eyes meeting the Primary Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment Outcomes Randomized Trial (PIVOT) criteria, 93.3% in eyes with a single break and 100% in eyes with a single break meeting PIVOT criteria. Eyes with a single gas injection had higher PARR than eyes requiring an additional gas injection (93.5% vs. 71.4%). CONCLUSION: Remote-learning utilizing social media effectively enabled PnR implementation with favorable anatomic and functional outcomes in a real-world setting in Japan.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it