Intracorneal Ring Segments Implantation Followed By Same-day Photorefractive Keratectomy and Corneal Collagen Cross-linking in Keratoconus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of intrastromal corneal ring segments implantation followed by same-day photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and ultraviolet-A/riboflavin collagen cross-linking (CXL) in patients with keratoconus. METHODS: Four patients (five eyes) were included in the study. All patients first underwent femtosecond laser-enabled placement of intracorneal ring segments (Intacs, Addition Technology). Uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) and keratometry readings remained stable for 6 months. Same-day PRK and CXL were subsequently performed in all patients. RESULTS: Six months after Intacs plus PRK/CXL, significant improvements were noted for UDVA, CDVA, spherical equivalent refraction, keratometry, and total aberrations. No patient lost lines of CDVA or developed haze. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of intracorneal ring segments implantation followed by sequential same-day PRK/CXL may be a reasonable option for improving visual acuity in select patients with keratoconus.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".