MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045030755 · doi:10.4137/oed.s16067

Safety and Efficacy of Cyclosporine in the Treatment of Chronic Dry Eye

2014· review· en· W2045030755 on OpenAlex
Clyde Schultz

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmology and Eye Diseases · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiseaseMedicineImmune systemDrugInflammationDesiccationHormoneMedical prescriptionPharmacologyIntensive care medicineBiologyImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dry-eye syndrome (DES) is a multifactorial disease affecting millions of individuals worldwide. Various factors, including age, hormonal status, genetics, sex, immune status, innervation status, nutrition, pathogens, and environmental stress, can alter the cellular and molecular structure or function of components of the ocular surface system. The resulting imbalance increases susceptibility to desiccation and epithelial damage, leading to a vicious circle in which inflammation amplifies and sustains further damage by chronic deregulation of the system. Lubricating agents and steroids have been used as treatment options. However, as the causes of the disease become better elucidated, the more chemically complex cyclosporine A has become an increasingly useful treatment option and in the United States is currently the only Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved prescription drug for the treatment of dry eye. The safety and efficacy of cyclosporine have been shown in numerous studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.692
Threshold uncertainty score0.580

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.321 · 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