Argon Versus Selective Laser Trabeculoplasty in Younger Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of argon laser trabeculoplasty (ALT) and selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) in lowering intraocular pressure (IOP) in younger patients (age 60 or less). METHODS: This was a prospective randomized control trial. Forty-two young patients (age 29 to 60 y) had 1 eye randomized to ALT (n=22) or SLT (n=20). IOP was measured before laser and 1 hour, 1 day, 6 weeks, 3 months, every 3 months until 2 years, and then yearly postlaser. Chi-square analysis and Student t test were used to determine statistical significance. RESULTS: The mean IOP before treatment was 21.9 mm Hg for ALT and 19.1 mm Hg for SLT with no statistical difference between the groups (P>0.05). At 2 years, 86.4% of ALT and 75.0% of SLT eyes required no further surgical intervention (laser trabeculoplasty or trabeculectomy). During the same time period, there was a statistically significant IOP decrease of 11.1% after ALT (P=0.01) and 7.7% after SLT (P=0.01) with no statistical difference between the lasers (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In younger patients, both ALT and SLT have a significant ocular hypotensive effect 2 years after treatment, with no differences in outcome identified between the laser modalities.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".