MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413140105 · doi:10.1097/iae.0000000000004641

CLINICAL AND DEMOGRAPHIC RISK FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH RECURRENT AND FELLOW EYE RHEGMATOGENOUS RETINAL DETACHMENTS

2025· article· en· W4413140105 on OpenAlex
Tina Felfeli, Fahmeeda Murtaza, David Rabinovitch, Rachel Goud, Matthew Veitch, Louis R. Giavedoni, Alan R. Berger, David R. Chow, Filiberto Altomare, Efrem D. Mandelcorn, David T. Wong

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRetina · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal and Macular Surgery
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health NetworkSt. Michael's HospitalPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProliferative vitreoretinopathyMedicineRetinal detachmentVisual acuityOphthalmologyRetrospective cohort studySurgeryRetinal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To identify clinical and surgical risk factors associated with recurrent rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) in the index eye and RRD in the fellow eye. METHODS: Retrospective observational study of adult patients who underwent RRD repair at two tertiary care centers over six years. RESULTS: Among 794 patients with primary RRD, recurrence occurred in 20.5%, and RRD in the fellow eye was observed in 5.2%. Postoperative visual acuity significantly improved at one year (95% CI -0.44 to 0.30; P < 0.001). Higher recurrence rates were found in patients with prolonged symptom duration ( P = 0.005), preoperative proliferative vitreoretinopathy ( P = 0.006), and worse initial visual acuity ( P < 0.001). Recurrences were most frequent within the first 90 days postoperatively, while fellow eye RRD primarily occurred after 1 year. Pneumatic retinopexy (SE 0.37; 95% CI 1.07-4.64, P = 0.03) and the extent of detachment (SE 0.04; 95% CI 1.0-1.2; P = 0.005) were significant predictors of recurrence in multivariate analyses. Age (SE 0.01; 95% CI 1.01-1.05; P = 0.01) and male sex (SE 0.38; 95% CI 1.66-7.47; P = 0.001) were significant predictors for fellow eye RRD. CONCLUSION: The study highlights pneumatic retinopexy and detachment extent as significant predictors of RRD recurrence. It also identifies older age and male sex as risk factors for RRD in the fellow eye. Our findings emphasize the importance of risk stratification and recommend close monitoring during the first 90 days and beyond the one-year postoperative period.

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)0.001
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.616

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.289 · 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