Optimal timing of capsular tension ring implantation: Miyake-Apple video analysis
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief PURPOSE: To evaluate the appropriate timing for capsular tension ring implantation in cases of zonular weakness either prior to or after lens extraction using Miyake-Apple video analysis. SETTING: John Moran Eye Center, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. METHODS: Four cadaver eyes were prepared using a standard Miyake-Apple protocol with image capture using digital video recording. After continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis and hydrodissection/viscodissection were performed, 2 eyes had early capsular tension ring implantation (CTR) and 2 eyes had CTR implantation after lens extraction. The 12.3 mm CTR was implanted in all eyes. Capsular bag torque and displacement, zonular elongation and stress, and ease of CTR placement were evaluated in each eye. RESULTS: Early CTR implantation resulted in significantly increased capsular torque and displacement of up to 4.0 mm compared to insertion in an empty capsular bag. There was significant zonular elongation and tension during early placement. CONCLUSION: In terms of minimizing further zonular stress and damage and capsular destabilization, the ideal timing for CTR placement is after lens extraction and decompression of the capsular bag. Miyake-Apple video analysis found capsular tension ring implantation after crystalline lens removal resulted in significantly less zonular stress and capsular bag displacement than when placed before lens extraction.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it