MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416209368 · doi:10.1097/ico.0000000000004017

Incidence of Primary Acquired Melanosis Within Pterygium Specimens: A 13-Year Retrospective Study in a Canadian Tertiary Center

2025· article· en· W4416209368 on OpenAlexaffabout
Judy Gaffar, Moncef Berkache, Kenan Bachour, Alexandre Nakao Odashiro, Marie-Claude Robert, Paul Thompson, Louis Racine, Laura Segal, Samir Jabbour, Mona Harissi‐Dagher

Bibliographic record

VenueCornea · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCorneal Surgery and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPterygiumIncidence (geometry)Retrospective cohort studyAtypiaPathological

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Primary acquired melanosis (PAM) and pterygia are ocular surface lesions associated with sun exposure, with distinct clinical and histopathological features. This study aims to determine the incidence of PAM within pathology specimens of presumed benign pterygium cases at a tertiary center in Montreal. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of all consecutive patients undergoing pterygium excision at a tertiary care center between 2010 and 2023 was performed. Pathology reports of excised pterygium samples were reviewed, with data collected on age, sex, and histopathological findings. Ethics approval was obtained from the institutional review board, and no patients were excluded. RESULTS: Among 1695 excised pterygia, 1277 (75.3%) specimens were submitted for pathology. Most were confirmed as pterygia (1230 samples, 96%). There were 40 unexpected findings (3.2%) including nevus or melanosis (13 cases), Salzmann nodules (5 cases), and ocular surface squamous neoplasia (4 cases). Two cases of PAM were identified: one with atypia in a 68-year-old French-Canadian man and another with no atypia in a 74-year-old Greek man. CONCLUSIONS: The low incidence of PAM observed highlights its rarity in presumed benign pterygium specimens. However, the identification of PAM with atypia emphasizes the need for routine pathological evaluation of all excised pterygia, even in the absence of clinical suspicion, due to the significant differences in management required for PAM.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.908

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCorneaSame topicCorneal Surgery and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207