Autologous grafting of extraocular muscles: experimental study in rabbits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility of autologous extraocular muscle grafting as a type of muscle expansion surgery. METHODS: The left superior rectus muscle of twenty-nine rabbits was resected and this fragment was attached to the endpoint of the respective right superior rectus (test group). Thereafter, the superior rectus of the left eye was reattached to the sclera (control group). Both groups were examined during different postoperative periods in order to assess their outcomes. RESULTS: The presence of hyperemia was slightly more frequent in the grafted group. Secretion and muscle atrophy were negligible in both groups. Fibrosis was greater in grafted animals. These muscles were weaker than the control muscles, although the force required to split muscular parts was always greater than the physiological one. CONCLUSIONS: This surgical technique was reliable and useful if one intends to achieve muscle expansion without the intrinsic risks of dealing with heterologous/artificial materials.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".