Lagophthalmos surgery in leprosy: findings from a population-based survey in Korea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lagophthalmos continues to be a serious problem in cured leprosy patients. We conducted a population-based survey of lagophthalmos surgical coverage (LSC), barriers to lagophthalmos surgery and outcome of lagophthalmos surgery in leprosy patients in South Korea. In our survey, there were 60 patients with lagophthalmos who had needed surgery (> 5 mm gap), 34 of whom had received surgery, resulting in a lagophthalmos surgery coverage of 57%. Among the 34 patients who had received lagophthalmos surgery, 18 needed further surgery. Among those who had never had surgery, none of the demographic indicators predicted surgical uptake; the primary reason given for failure to have surgery was lack of knowledge about it. Outcome of surgery (by eye) showed that 29% of eyes still had a gap of 5 mm or more. The frequency of symptoms (tearing, blurring of vision, pain, etc.) was high. Even in settings with a good eye care infrastructure, such as Korea, uptake of surgery can still be low and results may not be satisfactory to patients. There is a need for practical guidelines for leprosy control programmes in the areas of (a) patient recognition, (b) patient education, (c) monitoring the uptake of surgery, and (d) monitoring the outcome of surgery to ensure the best possible outcome.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".