MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965007057 · doi:10.1097/opx.0b013e318073c318

A Seven Year Survey of the Contact Lens Prescribing Habits of Canadian Optometrists

2007· article· en· W1965007057 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueOptometry and Vision Science · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsSt. Jerome's UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContact lensOrthokeratologyMedicineOptometryOphthalmologyReceiptCornea

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Little is known about the contact lens prescribing habits of optometrists in North America. The purpose of this survey was to obtain data on the types of lenses and solutions prescribed by Canadian optometrists. METHODS: One thousand Canadian optometrists were surveyed annually over seven consecutive years (2000 to 2006; n = 7000) on their contact lens prescribing preferences. Each survey requested a range of information about the contact lenses prescribed to the first 10 patients after its receipt. RESULTS: Over this time period, 1008 (14.4%) of the surveys were returned, providing data on 9383 fits. During the seven-year period, the ratio of male:female fits was 1:2 (3123:6217, 43 not reported), with a mean age of 31.3 +/- 13.6 years (range 2 to 82 years). The ratio of new fits to refits was 2:3 (3780:5518, 85 not reported), with 91.3% of all fits being soft contact lenses (SCL). Of the SCL fits, 59.5% were spherical, 28.5% toric, 9.7% multifocal, and 2.3% cosmetic tints. Gas permeable (GP) fits were 46.6% spherical, 18.6% toric, 19.5% multifocal, and 6.6% were for orthokeratology (OK). Over the seven-year period, SCL prescribed for continuous wear (CW) increased from 3.2% to 14.3% between 2000 and 2004 and reduced to 8.1% in 2006, for all fits. The use of mid-water content (MWC) materials decreased from 34.6% to 2.7% and the use of silicone hydrogel (SH) lenses increased from 61.4% to 96.2%, for all CW fits. GP lens continuous wear increased from 0.7% to 30.6% of all GP lens fits by 2006. Daily wear (DW) of SH lenses decreased from 49.6% (2000) to 33.7% (2004) and then increased to 86.1% in 2006, for SH fits. MWC SCL fit on a monthly planned replacement (PR) basis reduced in popularity over the seven-year period (75.0% to 39.9%) and in 2006 more patients were fit overall with SH lenses (42.9%). The use of non-PR SCL declined from 20.5% to 4.5% of all fits. Fitting of low-water content lenses also declined (15.1% to 7.0%). High-water content (5.4% to10.2%) and SH lenses (5.4% to 42.9%) both increased. By 2006, the majority of GP lenses fit were with high Dk (HDK) materials (50.3%). CONCLUSIONS: The preferred contact lens modality for Canadian optometrists appears to be DW SCL, which are replaced monthly. The proportion of lenses used for CW peaked in 2004, with SH SCL being the preferred material. The market share for GP lenses remains relatively unchanged, with an increasing proportion used for OK and CW. The launch of DW SH lenses in 2004 resulted in a marked increase in their reported fits, with a similar effect following the launch of a HDK GP lens material for CW.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.348 · 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