Tegaderm Transparent Dressing (3M) for the Treatment of Chronic Exposure Keratopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief We report an effective alternative treatment of profound chronic exposure keratopathy in a proptotic eye due to intraorbital extension of basal cell carcinoma. The corneal surface gradually reepithelialized in a 6-week period after the first application of Tegaderm transparent dressing (3M, St. Paul, MN, U.S.A.) with instillation of antibiotic ointment on the ocular surface. The patient has been comfortable with an intact epithelial surface, a vascularized cornea, and nonirritated surrounding skin after changing the Tegaderm dressing daily for 15 months. There was no evidence of recurrent corneal ulceration or infiltrations. We conclude that Tegaderm represents a useful treatment of exposure keratopathy due to chronic proptosis. The authors report the successful prolonged use of Tegaderm Transparent Dressing (3M) as an effective alternative treatment of profound exposure keratopathy not amenable to standard treatment regimens.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".