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 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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".