Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma: Differences in International Treatment Patterns and Costs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. I Introduction 2. The Health Economics of Glaucoma 3. II An Observational Study and Cost Simulation Model of Treatment Strategies in Patients with OH or POAG: Materials and Methods 4. Economic Evaluation : Theory and Methods 5. Observational Study 6. Markov model 7. Ac knowledgments and Guide to Presentation of Results by Country 8. III Results of Observational Study and the Simulation Model 9. Results for Australia 10. Results for Canada 11. Results for France 12. Results for Germany 13. Results for the Netherlands 14. Results for Spain 15. Results for Sweden 16. Results for the United Kingdom 17. Results for the United States 18. Comparative Data for all Countries 19. Summary of Regression Analyses 20. IV Discussion 21. Diagnosis, Untreated IOP, and Initial and Long-term Effect on IOP 22. Efficacy of Glaucoma Treatment - the Role of Trabeculectomy 23. What Triggers Change of Therapy? 24. V Conclusion 25. Concluding Remarks
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.037 | 0.004 |
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".