MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1274216528 · doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.09.007

Prospective randomized comparison of one- versus two-site Phacotrabeculectomy two-year results.

2008· article· en· W1274216528 on OpenAlexafffund
Yvonne M. Buys, David S. Rootman

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersPfizer Canada
KeywordsMedicineOphthalmology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Previous studies have failed to find a significant difference in intraocular pressure (IOP) between one- and two-site phacotrabeculectomy. A possible explanation has been relatively small samples and short follow-up. We prospectively observed 80 patients for 2 years randomized to one- versus two-site phacotrabeculectomy with the primary outcome measure being IOP. DESIGN: Prospective randomized controlled study. PARTICIPANTS: Eighty eyes were randomized and 79 underwent phacotrabeculectomy; 76 completed 24 months' follow-up. METHODS: Eligible patients scheduled for phacotrabeculectomy were randomized to one- or two-site phacotrabeculectomy after giving informed consent. A sample size of 54 was calculated to detect a difference of 2 mmHg between the groups with a power of 80%. Data recorded included demographics, visual acuity, IOP, endothelial cell counts, glaucoma medications, phacoemulsification settings, iris manipulation, suture lysis, needling, and complications. Follow-up data were obtained at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Mean IOP at 24 months. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the groups preoperatively. Mean IOPs were 17.6 versus 17.6, 12.6 versus 12.5, 13.1 versus 11.7, 13.1 versus 12.7, and 12.5 versus 12.9 mmHg for one- versus two-site at baseline and 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. There was a significant lowering of IOP compared with baseline at all time points (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in mean IOP between the groups at any time. The mean number of glaucoma medications decreased from 3.0 in each group to 0.2 and 0.4 for one- and two-site, respectively, at 24 months (P = 0.20). At 3 and 12 months, the endothelial counts (cells/mm(2)) were significantly lower in the two-site group: 2333 versus 2207 (P = 0.17), 2239 versus 1938 (P = 0.01), 2180 versus 1934 (P = 0.04), and 2147 versus 1947 (P = 0.08) at baseline and 3, 12, and 24 months, respectively. The surgical time was significantly longer for two-site (48.1+/-7.8 minutes) compared with one-site (39.2+/-6.4 minutes; P<0.001). CONCLUSION: At 2 years after phacotrabeculectomy, there was no statistically significant difference in IOP between groups. Corneal endothelial cell counts were significantly lower in the two-site group at 3 and 12 months. Two-site surgery took significantly more time.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations11
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicGlaucoma and retinal disordersFrench-language works237,207