Use of collagen shields for treatment of chronic bilateral corneal ulcers in a pet rabbit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A four-year-old, 1·3-kg entire male Holland Lop pet rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) was presented with a two-day history of bilateral epiphora and blepharospasm. Fluorescein staining revealed bilateral medio-ventral corneal ulceration. Initial topical treatment included ophthalmic broad-spectrum antibiotics and artificial tear solutions. Over a six-month period, antibiotics were changed based on corneal culture and sensitivity test results, and periodic corneal debridement was performed. With little to no improvement, and recurrence of the previous clinical signs, surgical intervention was considered but withheld because of individual pet consideration and owner's reluctance. Hydrophilic contact lenses were placed for corneal support but failed and caused a severe ocular response. Corneal collagen shields were placed bilaterally in order to promote corneal healing. Recheck examination performed seven days after placement revealed complete resolution of the ulcer in one eye and major reduction of the corneal ulcer in the contra-lateral eye.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".