MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pediatric eye injury due to Avena fatua (wild oats)

2001· review· en· W2013762759 on OpenAlexaff
Carolyn Taylor, Andrew Macnab

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Emergency Care · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEntomological Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Centre of Excellence for Women's HealthUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAvena fatuaForeign bodyEdemaConjunctivaAnesthesiaAbscessSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: We report on florid and unusual ophthalmic physical signs in three children where the trauma was caused by seeds from Avena fatua, a grass common in western North America. DESIGN: Case series and literature review. SETTING: Three local emergency departments (ED) during the fall of 1998. PATIENTS OR PARTICIPANTS: Three children reporting to an ED with an acutely painful eye from which the foreign body was identified botanically as Avena fatua. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Symptoms, interventions, duration of problem. RESULTS: Three male children (6, 10, 14 years) presented separately following incidents in which they had sustained direct eye injury. Each child immediately experienced severe pain and profuse watering of the eye. Severe localized edema of the conjunctiva and inflammation was evident with conjunctival vessel injection leading to bleeding, reminiscent of a chemical "burn." Initially, two children appeared to have an eyelash caught behind the lower lid. In both instances, the emergency physicians initially dismissed the possibility of there being a significant foreign body, but because of the severity of the pain, conjunctival vessel injection, and edema, they attempted to remove the "lash." Removal of the foreign body proved difficult in all three cases, requiring far greater traction than anticipated. Intact seedpods had become embedded in the subconjunctival space. Ophthalmic analgesia relieved the pain immediately, but in one child who was treated with topical antibiotic alone, significant pain was experienced for 18 hours, until steroid-antibiotic therapy was instituted. All injuries occurred in late summer when the grass propagates. CONCLUSIONS: The physical signs of scleral vasculitis and conjunctival edema can be mistaken for chemical injury or allergic chemosis, but where a foreign body resembling a hair or eyelash is visible, the presence of a seed-pod retained in the subconjunctival space must be considered, particularly if the patient reports exposure to wild grass. Application of local analgesia, foreign body removal, and steroid-antibiotic treatment is recommended.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.267 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Emergency CareSame topicEntomological Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207