The Association Between Mucin Balls and Corneal Infiltrative Events During Extended Contact Lens Wear
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the association between mucin ball formation and corneal infiltrative events (CIEs) during continuous wear with lotrafilcon A silicone hydrogel contact lenses. METHODS: Subjects (n = 205) in the Longitudinal Analysis of Silicone Hydrogel Contact Lens Study wore lotrafilcon A contact lenses for 12 months of continuous wear. The primary outcome was a CIE. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate the unadjusted cumulative incidence of remaining CIE free stratified by mucin ball presence. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to model the hazard of developing a CIE as a function of mucin ball formation and other covariates. RESULTS: Over half (54.2%) of the subjects displayed some presence of mucin balls during at least 1 visit and about one third (32.8%) displayed repeated episodes. Mucin ball scores were correlated between the 2 eyes and weakly correlated with corneal curvature (P ≤ 0.005). Univariate analyses revealed that the relative hazard for a CIE was 0.35 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.19-0.68] if a single episode of mucin balls was detected and 0.17 (95% CI, 0.06-0.43) if repeated episodes were detected. Upon multivariate analysis, repeated presence of mucin balls was associated with an 84% decreased hazard of experiencing a CIE (hazard ratio: 0.16; 95% CI, 0.06-0.44). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of mucin balls is significantly associated with a decreased incidence of CIEs, and the effect is greatest when they are repeatedly present over time. We hypothesize that the mucin ball presence represents a more concentrated or viscous mucus layer, which prevents upregulation of the immune response against bacterial ligands.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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".