MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049976135 · doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2008.09.031

Anterior segment optical coherence tomography–aided diagnosis and primary posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation with fibrin glue in traumatic phacocele with scleral perforation

2009· article· en· W2049976135 on OpenAlexaff
Gaurav Prakash, Dhivya Ashokumar, Soosan Jacob, Kaladevi Satish Kumar, Agarwal Athiya, Amar Agarwal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntraocular Surgery and Lenses
Canadian institutionsCegep de Sept Iles
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptical coherence tomographyFibrin glueOphthalmologyMedicineIntraocular lensAnterior Eye SegmentPerforationTraumatic cataractCorneal perforationSurgeryVisual acuityCorneaMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe the case of a middle-aged woman who presented to us after injury from a clenched fist 3 days previously. The diagnosis was occult scleral perforation, severe conjunctival chemosis, and traumatic aphakia. However, the lens could not be localized during posterior segment examination. An anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) examination showed scleral discontinuity and a heterogeneous reflection in the subconjunctival area, suggesting a possible phacocele. Surgical exploration confirmed these findings. Aphakia was managed using the "glued intraocular lens" technique in the same sitting. This case highlights the use of AS-OCT in noncontact exploration of the traumatized anterior segment and in diagnosis of a possible phacocele along with an occult scleral perforation with uveal prolapse. To our knowledge, this is the first report of successful implantation of a glued IOL as a primary procedure combined with scleral perforation repair.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.255
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 designCase report
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

Citations26
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cataract & Refractive SurgerySame topicIntraocular Surgery and LensesFrench-language works237,207