MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030694713 · doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2008.03.046

Secondary in-the-bag intraocular lens implantation following removal of Soemmering ring contents

2008· article· en· W2030694713 on OpenAlexaff
Howard V. Gimbel, Arvind Venkataraman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntraocular Surgery and Lenses
Canadian institutionsGimbel Eye Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntraocular lensOphthalmologyCapsulotomyMedicineCapsulorhexisCapsuleLens (geology)Cataract extractionLens capsuleIntraocular lensesTraumatic cataractPhacoemulsificationSurgeryVisual acuityOpticsBiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe a technique for removing and replacing a problematic sulcus intraocular lens (IOL) in the presence of a thick, large Soemmering ring and implanting a secondary IOL in the bag. This is accomplished by creating a new capsulotomy peripheral to the fibrosed original capsule opening, removing the secondary cataract, and placing the haptics of the IOL in the bag.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations13
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cataract & Refractive SurgerySame topicIntraocular Surgery and LensesFrench-language works237,207