Short term LASIK outcomes using the Technolas 217C excimer laser and Hansatome microkeratome in 46 708 eyes treated between 1998 and 2001
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To report the outcomes of a high-volume, multi-surgeon, multicentre LASIK corporation between 1998 and 2001. METHODS: 46,708 eyes of 24,138 consecutive patients with myopic astigmatism had undergone LASIK using the Bausch & Lomb Technolas 217C excimer laser and Hansatome microkeratome. The study included 38 surgeons operating at 11 surgical centres. 31 surgeons underwent standardised training regardless of previous experience, which included didactic, observership and proctorship components. Mean attempted spherical equivalent refraction correction was -4.02 ± 1.93 D (range -0.50 to -12.00 D). Mean attempted cylinder correction was 0.78 ± 0.69 D (range 0.00 to 3.50 D). Median follow-up was 3 months. RESULTS: Postoperative data with at least 1 month follow-up was available in 35,360 eyes (76%) of 18,195 patients. Predictability: mean deviation from intended spherical equivalent refraction correction was -0.21 ± 0.47 D with 81% of eyes within ±0.50 D and 95% of eyes within ±1.00 D. EFFICACY: uncorrected distance visual acuity was 20/20 in 71% of eyes and 20/40 in 95% of eyes. SAFETY: two or more lines of corrected distance visual acuity were lost in 0.57% of eyes. Postoperative corrected distance visual acuity was worse than 20/40 in 0.029% of eyes. CONCLUSIONS: The short-term results of a high-volume, multi-surgeon LASIK Corporation were comparable with those reported in the Food and Drug Administration clinical trials during the same period.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".