Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Corneal ectasia is a group of related diseases characterized by progressive corneal steepening and thinning. It includes keratoconus, pellucid marginal degeneration (PMD), and post-laser ectasia. Traditionally, treatment of these conditions has involved visual rehabilitation with spectacles or contact lenses, with often eventual need for corneal transplantation.Areas covered: This review focuses on refractive surgery treatment options available for ectasia including collagen cross-linking (CXL), excimer laser, intrastromal corneal ring segments (ICRSs), and intraocular lenses (IOLs). A comprehensive literature review using OVID Medline and Embase was undertaken.Expert commentary: CXL has shown promising short- and long-term results in stabilizing patients with corneal ectasia. When combined with excimer laser using topography- or wavefront-guided photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), many patients are able to gain significant improvements in visual acuity and contact lens tolerance, which may delay or prevent altogether the need for corneal transplantation. Other treatments such as ICRSs, phakic IOLs, and TORIC IOLs may be beneficial in select cases for visual rehabilitation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".