MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108118713 · doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2008.09.032

Case of late-onset corneal decompensation after iris-fixated phakic intraocular lens implantation

2009· article· en· W2108118713 on OpenAlexaff
Roy van Eijden, Niels E. de Vries, Lars P. J. Cruysberg, Carroll A.B. Webers, Tos T. J. M. Berenschot, Rudy M.M.A. Nuijts

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCorneal surgery and disorders
Canadian institutionsCegep de Sept Iles
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhakic intraocular lensMedicineOphthalmologyIRIS (biosensor)EctasiaCorneaDecompensationIridectomySurgeryVisual acuityIntraocular pressureRefractive error

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 48-year-old myopic patient with bilateral anterior chamber depth of 3.1 mm and endothelial cell density (ECD) of 2525 cells/mm(2) and 2638 cells/mm(2) preoperatively had bilateral implantation of an Artisan iris-fixated phakic intraocular lens (pIOL). Five years postoperatively, unilateral corneal stromal edema was seen in a circumscribed area overlying the temporal ridge of the pIOL in the right eye; the ECD was 1631 cells/mm(2) and the pachymetry, 586 microm. Explantation of the pIOL was refused by the patient. Seven years postoperatively, the ECD was 413 cells/mm(2) in the right eye and corneal decompensation occurred. The progressive unilateral endothelial loss was explained by excessive rubbing of the eyes because of chronic itching and an anterior shift of the pIOL over the 7 years as demonstrated by anterior optical coherence tomography.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cataract & Refractive SurgerySame topicCorneal surgery and disordersFrench-language works237,207