MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289882215 · doi:10.1097/opx.0000000000000840

Corneal Swelling with Cosmetic etafilcon A Lenses versus No Lens Wear

2016· article· en· W2289882215 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Moezzi, Jalaiah Varikooty, Marc Schulze, William Ngo, Kathrine Osborn Lorenz, Danielle Boree, Lyndon Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueOptometry and Vision Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOphthalmologySwellingMedicineContact lensLens (geology)SurgeryOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To determine if the use of pigments or adding polyvinyl pyrrolidone during the fabrication of 1-DAY ACUVUE DEFINE (AD) brand contact lenses impacts open-eye corneal swelling compared with no lens wear (NLW). METHODS: A partial double-masked, randomized, bilateral crossover study was conducted in 24 Asian subjects using AD, 1-DAY ACUVUE DEFINE with Lacreon (ADL), NLW, and a control lens with no tint (1-DAY ACUVUE MOIST [AM]). Central corneal thickness was measured before insertion and immediately after removal after 8 ± 1 h of open-eye wear using an optical pachymeter in one eye. Corneal thickness along a 10-mm cord was measured in the contralateral eye using the Visante optical coherence tomographer (OCT). Corneal swelling was tested for noninferiority using a 5% margin. The endothelial bleb response was measured at baseline and 20 min after lens insertion using specular microscopy. Subjective grading of corneal staining and limbal/bulbar hyperemia were also monitored. RESULTS: After 8 ± 1 h of open-eye wear, central corneal swelling across the study lenses with either optical pachymeter or OCT methods was negligible. Peripheral corneal swelling least-square mean differences with OCT were -0.03% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], -0.65 to 0.58%) and -0.26% (95% CI, -0.87 to 0.36%) between AD and ADL and the control lens (AM), respectively, and 1.67% (95% CI, 1.06 to 2.29%) and 1.45% (95% CI, 0.84 to 2.06%) between AD and ADL and NLW, respectively. No endothelial blebs were observed. No clinically significant differences were distinguished between the lenses and NLW for corneal staining and limbal/bulbar hyperemia. CONCLUSIONS: After 8 ± 1 h of open-eye wear, central and peripheral corneal swelling along the horizontal meridian with AD, ADL, AM, and NLW were equivalent. These results confirm that the addition of polyvinyl pyrrolidone or pigments to etafilcon A to obtain a limbal ring design have no impact on corneal swelling or limbal/bulbar hyperemia during normal open-eye 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptometry and Vision ScienceSame topicOcular Surface and Contact LensFrench-language works237,207