Twenty-four hour intraocular pressure monitoring with the SENSIMED Triggerfish contact lens: effect of body posture during sleep
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the difference in relative intraocular pressure (IOP) measured by the SENSIMED Triggerfish (TF) contact lens in flat compared with 30° head-up sleeping positions in patients with progressive primary open-angle glaucoma or normotensive glaucoma, based on recent or recurrent disc haemorrhage. DESIGN: Prospective, randomised, cross-over, open-label comparative study. METHODS: IOP was monitored for 24 hours using TF on two separate sessions. Patients were randomly assigned to sleep flat one night and 30° head-up the other. Outputs in arbitrary units were obtained. Sleep and wake periods were defined as 22:00-6:00 and 8:00-22:00, respectively. Mean TF values during sleep and wake periods and wake-sleep and sleep-wake slopes were calculated for each session. TF output signals were compared between positions. RESULTS: Twelve subjects completed the study. Significant mean positive slopes were noted during the sleep period for both positions (p<0.01). No significant differences in the TF mean values were observed between positions (p=0.51). Six (54%) subjects had mean TF values significantly higher during the flat supine session, while four (36%) subjects had higher values during the head-up session. A significant increase in Goldmann IOP (p=0.001) and TF (p=0.02) measurements were observed after 24 hours of TF wear ('drift phenomenon'). CONCLUSIONS: Sleep position affects IOP as measured by TF in some patients with progressive glaucoma. The upward drift in TF output detected in >50% of the subjects requires further investigation to establish whether the increased output values over time are an artefact induced by the TF or a real change in IOP. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01351779.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".