Post-operative analysis of pediatric esotropia associated with high hypermetropia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To describe clinical features, evaluation, surgical management and outcomes in children with esotropia associated with high hypermetropia. METHODS: Medical records of healthy children who received strabismus surgery for accommodative esotropia with hypermetropia larger than spherical equivalence of + 4.0 diopters from 2009 to 2015, were reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 47 patients were identified. The average age was 2.9 years old. The average spherical equivalence of cycloplegic refraction was + 6.0 diopters (D). All patients presented with large angle esotropia with spectacle correction. Average age of esotropia onset was 1.3 years. Average time between the onset of esotropia to spectacle correction was 7.2 months. Average duration between onset of constant esotropia to strabismus surgery was 28.1 months. Average duration between spectacle correction to strabismus surgery was 21.8 months. Post-operatively, 74.5% of patients achieved ocular alignment within 10 prism diopters (PD) of orthotropia. Overall, 66.0% patients developed sensory fusion. For patients who achieved surgical success, 71.4% developed sensory fusion, compared at 50.0% for patients who were over- or under-corrected (p = 0.18). For patients who received hyperopic spectacles within 6 months of esotropia onset, 92.3% developed sensory fusion, compared with 54.5% for patients who received hyperopic spectacles at 6 month or later after esotropia onset (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Strabismus surgery for esotropia with high hypermetropia has high rate of surgical success with low rate of under- or over-correction. There is a trend toward higher rate of sensory fusion for patients with surgical success. Shorter time interval between esotropia onset and receiving hyperopic spectacles is associated with higher rate of sensory fusion development.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 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".