Predicting extended wear complications from overnight corneal swelling.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine the hypothesis that the corneal overnight swelling response (ONSR) is a predictor of ocular complications in contact lens extended wear (EW). METHODS: The Berkeley Contact Lens Extended Wear Study (CLEWS) was a randomized, concurrently controlled clinical trial in which more than 200 subjects in EW with rigid gas-permeable (RGP) lenses were observed for 1 year. After adapting to EW, subjects were randomized to either medium or high oxygen-permeable (Dk) RGP lenses and underwent clinical assessments, keratometry, and corneal pachometry at 3-month intervals. RESULTS: The ONSR was directly related to lens Dk (P = 0.01) and exhibited substantial variability across subjects. The probability of remaining free of complications over time was not significantly lower for subjects with a mild ONSR compared with those with greater edema (P = 0.84). The risk of development of keratopathy was not significantly related to the ONSR (relative risk = 1.00). CONCLUSIONS: The corneal ONSR is not a good predictor of ocular complications in 1 year of RGP EW. Lenses that cause little or no corneal edema are not necessarily safer for overnight wear.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".