Comfort and Vision with Silicone Hydrogel Lenses: Effect of Compliance
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Silicone hydrogel (SH) lenses are usually replaced after 2 weeks (2W) or 1 month (1M); however, many patients do not comply with the manufacturers' recommended replacement frequency (MRRF). The purpose of this analysis was to investigate the effect of compliance with MRRF on comfort and vision in SH wearers. METHODS: As a part of a larger study investigating compliance with MRRF, patients were asked to rate their subjective comfort and vision from 0 (very poor) to 10 (excellent) in the morning, at the end of the day (EVE), when lenses were new, and needed replacing (NR). RESULTS: One thousand three hundred forty-four patients wore 2W replacement modality (2WR) (n = 717) or 1M replacement modality (1MR) (n = 617) SH lenses. Comfort and vision in the morning and when lenses are new were significantly higher than for EVE and NR (p < 0.001). Twenty-nine percent (95% confidence interval 25.3-32.4) of 1MR and 59% (95% confidence interval 55.5-62.7) of 2WR wearers were non-compliant with the MRRF. Compliance had a significant effect on EVE (p = 0.002, p = 0.008) and NR (p < 0.001, p < 0.001) comfort and vision. After accounting for compliance, EVE and NR comfort and EVE vision were higher for 1MR than 2WR (p = 0.015, p = 0.044, p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Compliant patients had better EVE and NR comfort and vision than non-compliant patients, regardless of replacement modality. Optimal subjective performance with SH lenses seems to be facilitated by replacing lenses as 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it