MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Late Traumatic Displacement of Laser In Situ Keratomileusis Flaps

2003· article· en· W2044934853 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph Anthony Tumbocon, Robert Paul, Allan R. Slomovic, David S. Rootman

Bibliographic record

VenueCornea · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCorneal surgery and disorders
Canadian institutionsToronto Public HealthToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKeratomileusisMedicineLASIKDehiscenceSurgeryVisual acuityOphthalmology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To report the occurrence, management, and outcome of late-onset traumatic dehiscence and dislocation of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) flaps. METHODS: Two interventional case reports of patients with late-onset LASIK corneal flap dislocation after ocular trauma occurring at 7 and 26 months after surgery, respectively. RESULTS: The flaps were lifted, stretched, and repositioned after irrigation and scraping of the stromal bed and the underside of the flap. A bandage contact lens was placed, and topical antibiotic and corticosteroids were given postoperatively. The dislocated corneal flaps were successfully repositioned in both cases. The patient whose dislocated flap was repositioned 4 hours after the trauma recovered his uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) of 20/20 1 week after the procedure and had a well-positioned flap with a clear interface. The patient who was managed 48 hours after the injury required repeat flap repositioning at 10 and 24 days after the initial procedure for treatment of persistent folds and striae in the visual axis. His uncorrected visual acuity 2 weeks after the third flap repositioning was 20/40 + 2. Diffuse lamellar keratitis developed in both patients that resolved with the use of topical corticosteroids. CONCLUSION: Laser in situ keratomileusis corneal flaps are vulnerable to traumatic dehiscence and dislocation, which can occur more than 2 years after the procedure.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 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

Citations41
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCorneaSame topicCorneal surgery and disordersFrench-language works237,207