MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023993032 · doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2011.09.038

Results of laser in situ keratomileusis performed using solid-state laser technology

2012· article· en· W2023993032 on OpenAlexaff
David P. Piñero, Rafael J. Pérez‐Cambrodí, Aránzazu Gómez-Hurtado, Francisco J. Blanes-Mompó, Antonio Alzamora‐Rodríguez

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCorneal surgery and disorders
Canadian institutionsContinental (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKeratomileusisDioptreLASIKMedicineComa (optics)OphthalmologyVisual acuityLaserOptometryOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To evaluate and report the visual, refractive, and aberrometry outcomes of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) to correct low to moderate myopia using a commercial solid-state laser. SETTING: Oftalmar, Medimar International Hospital, Alicante, Spain. DESIGN: Prospective case series. METHODS: This study evaluated consecutive eyes with low to moderate myopia that had LASIK performed using a Pulzar Z1 solid-state laser. Visual, refractive, and aberrometry changes as well as potential complications were evaluated. RESULTS: The study enrolled 60 eyes (34 patients). The mean follow-up was 8.5 months (range 6 to 13 months). There was a significant improvement in logMAR uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) postoperatively (P<.01). No significant change was detected in logMAR corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) (P=.21). The postoperative logMAR UDVA was 0.1 (approximately 20/25) or better in 57 eyes (95.00%). The mean overall efficacy index was 0.99 and the mean safety index, 1.02. Postoperatively, 1 eye (1.67%) lost lines (1 line) of CDVA. The postoperative spherical equivalent was within ± 0.50 diopter in 58 eyes (96.67%). There was a small, but statistically significant increase in the primary coma root mean square (0.17 μm) and in the magnitude of primary spherical aberration (0.09 μm). No severe complications occurred. CONCLUSION: Laser in situ keratomileusis using the solid-state laser provided predictable correction of low to moderate myopia, minimizing the induction of higher-order aberrations and preserving CDVA. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.345
Threshold uncertainty score0.736

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cataract & Refractive SurgerySame topicCorneal surgery and disordersFrench-language works237,207