Objective and Subjective Responses in Patients Refitted to Daily‐Wear Silicone Hydrogel Contact Lenses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Silicone hydrogel (SiH) lenses offer many physiological advantages for daily wear (DW) in addition to the continuous-wear modality for which they were originally developed. The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical performance and physiological responses in a group of successful long-term wearers of conventional hydrogel lenses when refitted with DW SiH contact lenses. METHODS: Eighty-seven successful soft lens wearers (8.4+/-4.7 years of prior lens wear) participated in this study. Bulbar and limbal hyperemia were subjectively graded and digitally photographed for subsequent masked objective evaluation. Subjective symptoms were scored using visual analog scales. In addition, refractive error, corneal curvature, and corneal thickness were measured. All subjects were refitted with Focus Night & Day (lotrafilcon A) SiH lenses; however, to reduce the potential for bias, they were informed that they were being randomly assigned to wear either low oxygen permeability (Dk) lenses or high Dk SiH lenses and were "masked" as to their lens assignment. Subjects returned after 1 week, 1 month, and 2 months of DW, at which time all gradings, photographs, and measurements were repeated. End-of-day subjective symptoms were also graded periodically during the study. RESULTS: Ninety-three percent of subjects were successfully refitted. Both objective and subjective evaluations showed that bulbar and limbal hyperemia decreased significantly in all quadrants during the study (p<0.001), particularly for those subjects with greater baseline hyperemia (p<0.001). Subjects reported a concurrent reduction in end-of-day dryness and improved end-of-day comfort compared with their habitual lenses (p<0.001). No significant changes in refractive error, tarsal papillary response, corneal curvature, or corneal thickness were found during the study. CONCLUSIONS: Hyperemia in contact lens wearers may be attributed to a number of factors, including hypoxia. Refitting existing low Dk lens wearers with SiH lenses on a DW basis can result in a decrease in hyperemia, which may be significant for some subjects and also results in improvements in symptoms of dryness and discomfort.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".