MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605544114 · doi:10.1088/1612-202x/aa6b1a

Laser-assisted formation of micropores and nanobubbles in sclera promote stable normalization of intraocular pressure

2017· article· en· W2605544114 on OpenAlexaff
Olga I. Baum, Sebastian Wachsmann‐Hogiu, Thomas E. Milner, Emil N. Sobol

Bibliographic record

VenueLaser Physics Letters · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersRussian Foundation for Basic Research
KeywordsScleraLaserMaterials scienceGlaucomaIntraocular pressureIrradiationMicroscopyBiophysicsOpticsOphthalmologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Pores in sclera enhance uveoscleral water outflow and can normalize intraocular pressure in glaucomatous eyes. The aims of this study are to demonstrate laser-induced formation of pores with a dendritic structure and to answer the questions: How is a pore system stable and can laser treatment provide a long-lasting pressure stabilization effect? Effect of 1.56 µ m laser radiation on porcine eye sclera was studied using atomic force microscopy and super resolution structured irradiation microscopy with fluorescent markers. Results suggest that the pores with a complex spatial configuration can arise as a result of laser irradiation and that laser-generated stable gas nanobubbles coated with calcium ions allow pore stabilization in the sclera. Our results support a laser based approach for treatment of glaucoma.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLaser Physics LettersSame topicGlaucoma and retinal disordersFrench-language works237,207