Overnight Corneal Swelling With Silicone Hydrogel Contact Lenses With High Oxygen Transmissibility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare central corneal swelling after 8 hours of sleep in eyes wearing 2 different silicone hydrogel lenses with high oxygen transmissibility. METHODS: Twenty neophyte subjects were randomly assigned to wear a comfilcon A lens (CooperVision Inc) in one eye and a lotrafilcon A lens (CIBA Vision) in the contralateral eye for an 8-hour overnight period. The study was repeated with another 20 neophyte subjects wearing comfilcon A in one eye only and no lens in the contralateral control eye. Central corneal thickness was measured with optical pachometry before lens insertion, immediately after lens removal on waking, at 20 and 40 minutes, 1 hour, 2 hours and 3 hours. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the amount of overnight central corneal swelling induced by the 2 lenses (4.1% +/- 1.9% with comfilcon A vs. 4.0% +/- 1.7% with lotrafilcon A; P>0.05). The swelling of the comfilcon A lens-wearing eyes was significantly higher than that found in the non-lens-wearing contralateral eyes (4.5% +/- 2.1% vs. 3.0% +/- 1.7%; P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The same amount of overnight corneal swelling was induced by the 2 study lenses. The higher overnight swelling observed with the comfilcon A lenses compared to the non-lens-wearing eyes is similar to that reported in the literature for studies using lotrafilcon A lenses.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".