MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Management of Filamentary Keratitis Associated with Aqueous-Deficient Dry Eye

2003· review· en· W2011755040 on OpenAlexaff
Julie Albietz, Paul G. Sanfilippo, Robyn Troutbeck, and LEE M. LENTON

Bibliographic record

VenueOptometry and Vision Science · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsVictoria Park
FundersQueensland University of Technology
KeywordsKeratitisMedicineContact lensKERATOCONJUNCTIVITIS SICCAOphthalmologyAcanthamoeba keratitisDermatologyArtificial tearsCorneaCorneal ulcerationKeratoconjunctivitisSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To review the incidence, underlying pathophysiology, and clinical features of filamentary keratitis and to identify evidence-based best-practice strategies for managing filamentary keratitis. METHODS: A comprehensive review of published literature was undertaken. Recommendations for best-practice management strategies were based on the available evidence. Three cases are presented to illustrate the clinical findings and management of patients with chronic filamentary keratitis. RESULTS: Although the evidence base is limited by the absence of well-designed studies, current evidence indicates the following: (1) Aqueous-deficient dry eye (keratoconjunctivitis sicca) is the most common ocular condition associated with filamentary keratitis. (2) Current best-practice management of filamentary keratitis involves treating the underlying dry eye and specific treatments for the corneal filaments. Proposed treatments include nonpreserved lubricants, topical steroidal and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents, and punctal plugs for aqueous-deficient dry eye as well as mechanical removal of filaments, hypertonic saline, mucolytic agents, and bandage contact lenses for the filaments. (3) Filamentary keratitis can be induced or exacerbated by contact lens wear and ocular surgical procedures such as cataract surgery and corneal graft surgery. Pre- and postoperative ocular surface management strategies should be considered in the surgical planning of patients with, or who are susceptible to, filamentary keratitis. Filamentary keratitis can also be induced and/or exacerbated by chronic use of ocular and/or systemic medications, and alternate medications or additional measures to manage the tear film and ocular surface may be required in these cases. CONCLUSIONS: Filamentary keratitis can be a chronic, recurrent, and debilitating condition. With a systemic approach to diagnosis and management, the condition can be effectively controlled and the incidence and severity of recurrences minimized.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.393 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations65
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptometry and Vision ScienceSame topicOcular Surface and Contact LensFrench-language works237,207