MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128101506 · doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.12.039

Outcomes of wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis for hyperopia

2011· article· en· W2128101506 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nancy Keir, Trefford Simpson, Natalie Hutchings, Lyndon Jones, D. Fonn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKeratomileusisDioptreLASIKOphthalmologyAstigmatismContrast (vision)MedicineCorneal topographyOptometryVisual acuityRefractive surgerySpherical aberrationOpticsPhysicsCorneaLens (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To determine the impact of wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for hyperopia on corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), contrast sensitivity, and higher-order aberrations (HOAs). SETTING: Centre for Contact Lens Research, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. DESIGN: Case series. METHODS: This study comprised patients who had LASIK for hyperopia. The HOAs up to the 4th order (5.0 mm pupil) in right eyes were analyzed. RESULTS: The study enrolled 31 patients. The preoperative mean values were sphere, +2.60 diopters (D) ± 1.15 (SD) (range +1.00 to +5.00 D); astigmatism, -0.87 ± 0.74 D (range 0.00 to -3.75 D); and spherical equivalent (SE), +2.16 ± 1.00 D (range +0.63 to +4.50 D). The postoperative refractive SE was within ±0.50 D in 71.0% of eyes. The uncorrected distance visual acuity was 20/20 or better in 87.2% of eyes. There was no significant change in CDVA or contrast sensitivity (all P>.05). There was a significant change in Zernike coefficients Z(0,4), Z(-1,3), Z(-3,3), and Z(3,3) (range of mean absolute change ± SEM: 0.092 ± 0.013 μm to 0.208 ± 0.018 μm; all P<.001). Coefficients Z(-1,3) and Z(3,3) increased and Z(0,4) and Z(-3,3) decreased in magnitude; each had a reversal of sign. The only significant postoperative association was between low-contrast CDVA and Z(0,4) (r=0.617, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Low-contrast CDVA after LASIK surgery for hyperopia was correlated with Z(0,4). There were no significant changes in CDVA or contrast sensitivity. The relative risk for losing low-contrast CDVA increased if more than 1 Zernike term had a sign change.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations18
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cataract & Refractive SurgerySame topicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesFrench-language works237,207