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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aims to determine whether frozen corneas can be successfully used as carriers of the Boston keratoprosthesis (KPro). METHODS: Prospective study of 37 patients undergoing KPro surgery with fresh or frozen corneas as carriers. Patients were randomized to receive either a fresh corneal graft or a frozen corneal graft during implantation of the Boston KPro. The randomization depended on availability of fresh versus frozen corneas offered by the local eye bank. All surgeries were performed by the same experienced surgeon. Outcome measures included retention of the device, level of preoperative and postoperative visual acuities (VAs), and complications. RESULTS: The indication for Boston KPro was corneal graft failure in 24 eyes; 13 patients had KPro as a primary procedure. The assembly of the Boston KPro and surgery were uneventful in all cases. Mean follow-up was 9.65 months. Median preoperative VA was counting fingers (range, 20/100 to light perception) in the fresh cornea group (19 eyes) and hand motions (range, 20/150 to light perception) in the frozen cornea group (18 eyes). Median postoperative VA were 20/150 (range, 20/30 to hand motions) and 20/150 (range, 20/40 to counting fingers) in the fresh and frozen cornea groups, respectively. Inflammation and retroprosthetic membrane formation were the most common complications with similar rates between the 2 groups. The device retention rate was 100% at the end of the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Frozen and fresh corneal donors seem equally efficient and safe as carriers of the Boston KPro with similar recuperation of VA and no untoward complications, such as melt, leaks, or endophthalmitis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it