Focal Limbal Stem Cell Deficiency in Turner Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to report the presence of focal limbal stem cell deficiency (LSCD) in 2 cases of Turner syndrome. METHODS: This is a case review. RESULTS: A 25-year-old woman with a history of Turner syndrome diagnosed at 15 years of age was referred for "advanced chronic bilateral phlyctenular disease." The patient's visual acuity at presentation was 20/25-2 in the right eye and 20/30-2 in the left eye. Slit-lamp examination of both eyes showed inferior conjunctivalization of the corneal epithelium consistent with LSCD. The patient was started on topical cyclosporine 0.05%. A 23-year-old woman with the Turner syndrome was referred for rosacea keratitis. An ocular assessment revealed the visual acuity at presentation to be 20/25 in the right eye and 20/30 in the left eye. Slit-lamp examination of both eyes showed significant conjunctivalization with epithelial scarring and opacity. The patient was started on erythromycin ointment before bedtime, artificial tears, and warm compresses. CONCLUSIONS: This study reports the first cases in the literature describing the coexistence of LSCD and Turner syndrome. Management of any ocular surface inflammation is important to prevent the progression of LSCD.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".