MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414717509 · doi:10.3389/fneur.2025.1672043

Case Report: Transient monocular vision loss with isolated paracentral acute middle maculopathy on optical coherence tomography: beware of giant cell arteritis!

2025· article· en· W4414717509 on OpenAlexaff
George Alencastro Landim, Étienne Bénard-Séguin, Nancy J. Newman, Valérie Biousse

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neurology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal and Optic Conditions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaculopathyMonocularOptical coherence tomography angiographyEye diseaseOptical coherence tomographyVision disorderRetinalRetinopathy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: We describe a case of transient monocular vision loss (TMVL) and paracentral acute middle maculopathy (PAMM) on optical coherence tomography (OCT) as the only ocular presentation of biopsy-proven GCA. Case description: An 80-year-old woman presented 4 days after an episode of TMVL in the right eye, which lasted for 2 hours and spontaneously resolved. She also had jaw claudication for 1 month. Visual acuity was 20/20 in both eyes, with no relative afferent pupillary defect. Funduscopic examination was normal. Humphrey visual fields (HVF 24-2) were full in both eyes. Spectral domain OCT of the right eye demonstrated a focal lesion with increased hyperreflectivity at the level of the inner nuclear layer, consistent with PAMM. Fluorescein angiography and indocyanine angiography were normal. She was immediately treated with intravenous steroids for presumed giant cell arteritis (GCA), confirmed subsequently by temporal artery biopsy. Conclusion: Most reported GCA patients with PAMM have had permanent vision loss and other obvious funduscopic findings. This unique patient had only TMVL and a normal ophthalmologic examination, including full HVF, and no ischemia on retinal angiographic studies. Immediate macular OCT revealing PAMM in TMVL patients older than age 50 years should suggest GCA and prompt immediate treatment to prevent permanent vision loss.

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 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)0.000
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: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.616
Threshold uncertainty score0.595

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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 venueFrontiers in NeurologySame topicRetinal and Optic ConditionsFrench-language works237,207