MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040325415 · doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2009.09.028

Repositioning free laser in situ keratomileusis flaps

2010· article· en· W2040325415 on OpenAlexaff
Amit Todani, Khalid Al-Arfaj, Samir A. Melki

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCorneal surgery and disorders
Canadian institutionsCegep de Sept Iles
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrokeratomeKeratomileusisLASIKMedicineFree flapSurgeryOphthalmologyCornea

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe a protocol for adequate repositioning of free laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) corneal flaps created by a Moria M2 microkeratome even in the absence of fiduciary marks. In an enucleated porcine globe, a free flap was created by initially placing a longitudinal incision at the proposed hinge site followed by activating the forward pass of the automated microkeratome. A protocol was devised based on placement of a positioning dot on the free flap before the flap is retrieved from the microkeratome head. Preplaced surgical landmarks were used as a guide to determine the correct alignment of the free flap. Adequate orientation of the free flap to the stromal bed was achieved in 9 porcine eyes using the positioning dot method. The technique is applicable to the Moria M2 microkeratome only and must be validated for other types of keratomes.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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