MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W89987640 · doi:10.5588/ijtld.11.0766

Incidence of ethambutol-related visual impairment during treatment of active tuberculosis [Review article]

2013· review· en· W89987640 on OpenAlex

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

VenueThe International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDrug-Induced Ocular Toxicity
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVisual impairmentEthambutolIncidence (geometry)TuberculosisRelative riskInternal medicinePediatricsIsoniazidConfidence intervalPathologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Recent World Health Organization guidelines recommend the addition of ethambutol (EMB) throughout standardised treatment of new cases of active tuberculosis (TB) in populations with increased prevalence of isoniazid resistance to reduce the risk of creating multidrug resistance. This could expose patients to the risk of blindness. METHODS: We searched Cochrane, Embase and PubMed electronic databases from 1965 to February 2011 for original studies that prospectively followed all patients treated with EMB for active TB, and routinely ascertained the occurrence of visual toxicity using standard methods. Pooled estimates, overall and stratified by major covariates, were calculated using random effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Pooled cumulative incidence of any visual impairment in all patients was 22.5 per 1000 persons treated with EMB (95%CI 10.2-35), and permanent impairment was 4.3/1000 (95%CI 0.3-9.0). After restricting the analyses to arms in which the average dose was 27.5 mg/kg/day or less and treatment was for 2-9 months, the incidence of any visual impairment was 19.2/1000 (95%CI 5.8-33), and permanent impairment was 2.3/1000 persons (95%CI 0-6.1) treated, as the majority of episodes were reversible. In reversible cases, resolution of impairment occurred after an average of 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: In this review, any visual impairment occurred in 22.5/1000 persons receiving EMB at standard doses for up to 9 months, and permanent impairment in 2.3/1000-an important risk. However, these estimates are imprecise, and the studies were of variable quality and the results heterogeneous. Well-designed prospective studies with repeated measurements of multiple visual parameters that clearly describe the degree of permanent impairment are needed.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.924

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.336 · 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