MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1878715772 · doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.01.019

Phacoemulsification combined with a new ab interno gel stent to treat open-angle glaucoma: Pilot study

2015· article· en· W1878715772 on OpenAlexaff
Arsham Sheybani, Markus Lenzhofer, Melchior Hohensinn, Herbert A. Reitsamer, Iqbal Ike K. Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsCredit Valley Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGlaucomaPhacoemulsificationIntraocular pressureGlaucoma medicationOpen angle glaucomaOphthalmologyGlaucoma surgeryStentCataract surgeryPrivate practiceClinical trialProspective cohort studySurgeryVisual acuityInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To study the effect on intraocular pressure (IOP) of implanting a new gelatin stent at the time of cataract surgery in the treatment of open-angle glaucoma (OAG). SETTING: Multicenter university and private-practice settings. DESIGN: Nonrandomized prospective clinical trial. METHODS: The implantation of 2 models of a gelatin stent (Xen140 and Xen63) was performed at the time of cataract surgery without mitomycin-C. Complete success was defined as a postoperative IOP of less than 18 mm Hg and more than a 20% reduction in IOP at 12 months without glaucoma medication. Failure was defined as loss of light perception vision or worse, a need for additional glaucoma surgery, or less than a 20% reduction in the IOP from baseline. RESULTS: The study included 37 eyes of 37 patients. The mean preoperative IOP was 22.4 mm Hg ± 4.2 (SD) on 2.5 ± 1.4 medication classes. Twelve months postoperatively, the mean IOP was reduced to 15.4 ± 3.0 mm Hg on 0.9 ± 1.0 medication classes (P < .0001). This resulted in a qualified success of 85.3% and a complete success rate off medications of 47.1%. There were no failures. CONCLUSION: Cataract surgery combined with implantation of the gelatin stent resulted in a significant reduction in IOP in eyes with OAG. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: Dr. Sheybani has received travel reimbursement from Aquesys, Inc. Dr. Ahmed is a paid consultant to Aquesys, Inc. No other author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations115
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cataract & Refractive SurgerySame topicGlaucoma and retinal disordersFrench-language works237,207