Choroidal features on widefield optical coherence tomography angiography in eyes with circumscribed choroidal hemangioma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate choroidal morphologic and vascular findings in eyes with circumscribed choroidal hemangioma (CCH) in a 21 mm × 26 mm widefield (WF) OCT-Angiography (OCTA; VG200D: Intalight Inc., San Jose, CA). METHODS: Consecutive patients with CCH were included in this prospective, observational study at the Department of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Medical University of Vienna, Austria. Imaging consisted of ultrasonography and WF-OCTA. Choroidal vascularity index (CVI) and choroidal thickness (CT) were assessed in study eyes (SE) and fellow eyes (FE) using the software of the device. Measurement of CT and CVI excluded the area of CCH and an equivalent area of FE. RESULTS: Nineteen patients (female: n = 9 (47.4%), mean age: 61 ± 11 years) were included in the study. In ultrasonography, the mean largest basal diameter and thickness were 7.32 ± 2.12 mm and 2.81 ± 0.75 mm, respectively. CT was statistically significantly higher in SE, as compared to FE (294.6 ± 74.2 µm vs 239.9 ± 46.8 µm; paired t test p < 0.001), while CVI was statistically significantly lower in SE, as compared to FE (0.44 ± 0.05 vs 0.45 ± 0.05; paired t test: p = 0.012). Intraretinal or subretinal fluid had no statistically significant influence on CT (with fluid: 303.0 ± 84.3 µm vs without fluid: 285.3 ± 65.0 µm; t test: p = 0.619) and CVI (with fluid: 0.42 ± 0.05 vs without fluid: 0.45 ± 0.03; t test: p = 0.185). CONCLUSIONS: Intraretinal or subretinal fluid had no impact on CT and CVI of SE. CT is higher and CVI is lower in SE as compared to FE, when excluding the area of CCH in SE and an equivalent area in FE. This suggests that the choroid plays a crucial role in the disease mechanism of CCH.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".