How Long Can Donor Sclera Be Safely Stored?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine whether after prolonged storage of sclera in glycerin, there is any bacteriologic contamination that will reactivate, whether reconstituted sclera retains its tensile strength, and whether sclera retains its microstructural integrity. METHODS: Sixty-six scleral shells stored in glycerin for 9 to 19 years, as well as 11 controls stored for 6 months to 4 years, were studied by cutting a small wedge of tissue from the anterior margin of each and directly inoculating into thioglycolate broth, cutting an equatorial ring and determining its break strength using a tensiometer, and cutting a small piece from the remaining posterior portion and examining by scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS: After such prolonged storage, bacteriologic contamination was not detected, tensile strength generally increased with increasing duration of storage, and ultrastructural integrity was maintained on scanning electron microscopy. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that storage of scleral shells can be safely prolonged; we hope this can facilitate an increased supply of donated sclera to patients and surgeons.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".