MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967573125 · doi:10.1136/bcr.12.2009.2540

Sulcus fixated injectable toric intraocular lens to correct astigmatism following penetrating keratoplasty in a pseudophakic eye

2010· article· en· W1967573125 on OpenAlexaff
Sathish Srinivasan, D Lyall, J. C. Watt

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Case Reports · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCorneal surgery and disorders
Canadian institutionsDouglas College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnisometropiaMedicineOphthalmologyAstigmatismIntraocular lensTrabeculectomyVisual acuityOptometryCorneal topographyPseudophakiaRefractive errorIntraocular pressureOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 56-year-old Caucasian male was referred to the corneal service for the management of post penetrating keratoplasty (PK) astigmatism in his right eye. He had also previously undergone trabeculectomy and cataract surgery in the same eye. Corneal topography showed high postoperative astigmatism of 8.74 dioptres. He was intolerant to contact lens wear and could not tolerate spectacle correction due to high anisometropia. He proceeded to undergo a secondary ‘piggyback’ toric intraocular lens (IOL) insertion procedure with an improvement in his best corrected visual acuity to 6/9. With the decrease in anisometropia he was able to tolerate a full spectacle correction. We report the use of a new injectable sulcus fixated toric piggyback IOL for the correction of post PK astigmatism in a pseudophakic eye. To the best of our knowledge this is the first report on the use of this new ‘add on’ IOL for this clinical condition.

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)0.000
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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Case ReportsSame topicCorneal surgery and disordersFrench-language works237,207