Capsular tension rings and related devices: current concepts.
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To discuss current designs, indications, contraindications and controversies pertaining to capsular tension devices. RECENT FINDINGS: Capsular tension rings and other newer endocapsular support devices have become increasingly important in the management of zonular weakness during cataract extraction. They have been found to improve both intraoperative support during phacoemulsification and postoperative intraocular lens centration. Since the introduction of the original capsular tension rings in 1991, there has been a progressive evolution of this device to help deal with profound zonular weakness. These newer devices, which permit scleral-suture fixation, include the modified capsular tension ring and the capsular tension segment. SUMMARY: Continual advances in capsular tension device technology have allowed for increased safety and efficacy in performing cataract surgery in patients with zonular weakness with newer devices being evolved to manage more profound cases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it