MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2776846587 · doi:10.22374/jclrs.v1i1.11

Qualitative Assessment of Scleral Shape Patterns Using a New Wide Field Ocular Surface Elevation Topographer

2017· article· en· W2776846587 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Gregory DeNaeyer, Donald R. Sanders, Eef van der Worp, Jason Jedlicka, Langis Michaud, Sheila Morrison

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Contact lens Research and Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCorneal surgery and disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScleraScleral lensElevation (ballistics)OphthalmologyGeologySagittal planeMeridian (astronomy)Corneal topographyMedicineCorneaMathematicsGeometryAnatomyPhysicsAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Objectives: Objective was to examine new findings regarding conjunctival/scleral shape mapped with a novel wide field elevation topography device and software, to propose a new classification system for scleral shape. Methods: The Scleral Shape Study Group (SSSG) collaborated on this research. Data was collected from 152 eyes of prospective scleral lens patients utilizing a new topography device and software specifically designed to measure and map the sclera out to as much as 22 mm. Circumferential scleral plots of sagittal height vs. meridian at 14, 15 and 16mm diameters from the corneal center were generated for each eye. Scleral shape patterns were reviewed in all cases and classified according to recurring characteristics. Results: Twelve eyes were excluded from the analysis due to incomplete data. Of the remaining 140 eyes, 8 (5.7%), of the plots were primarily spherical (Group 1) and 40 (28.6%) were primarily regularly toric, largely conforming to a toric (Sin2) curve with approximately 180° periodicity or interval between elevation to elevation or depression to depression (Group 2). Fifty-seven cases (40.7%) had asymmetric depressions (or steep areas) or asymmetric elevations (or flat areas) which were classified as Group 3. The remaining 35 cases (26%) had a recognizable toric pattern with elevations and depressions but they were irregularly spaced or did not have the customary 180° periodicity (Group 4). Conclusion: A new classification of conjunctival/scleral shape is presented based upon data now available through wide field elevation topography, which could be helpful in scleral lens fitting and potentially soft lens fitting as the landing zone of these lenses are beyond the corneal borders.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.263
GPT teacher head0.528
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations44
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Contact lens Research and ScienceSame topicCorneal surgery and disordersFrench-language works237,207