Shrinking Upper and Lower Eyelid Skin with a Novel Radiofrequency Tip
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many subjects wish to have tightening of eyelid skin but are reluctant to undergo aesthetic blepharoplasty surgery. We wanted to perform a small pilot study to test the efficacy and safety of a 0.25-cm(2) monopolar radiofrequency tip in a prospective noncomparative study as a novel nonsurgical method to safely tighten upper and lower eyelid skin in subjects of differing ethnicity and sex. METHODS: Twenty adult subjects were enrolled in this prospective pilot study. All received symmetrical monopolar radiofrequency treatments in multiple passes to the pretarsal, preseptal, and lateral orbital skin. All subjects wore a protective plastic haptic contact lens to protect their vision during the radiofrequency treatment. (Haptic contact lenses fit over the entire anterior surface of the globe from superior to inferior and medial to lateral fornix. The purpose of using such a large contact lens was to protect the globe itself from radiofrequency energy.) Standardized color digital photography with eyes both open and closed was taken on each visit. Treatment efficacy was evaluated by both the expert observer and the subject at each visit. RESULTS At 6-month follow-up, according to the expert observer, 26 upper lids (87%) showed 25% or more tightening. Twenty lower lids (67%) showed 25% or more tightening. Two subjects (3.33%) had 51% to 75% upper lid tightening at 6 months. There were no adverse events beyond one subject with minimal corneal epithelial punctate defects on the treatment day. These resolved over several hours. CONCLUSIONS: The use of this new tip was shown to be safe. Effectiveness at shrinking eyelid skin was at best mild to moderate.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".