Conservative therapy for chalazia: is it really effective?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the within-treatment efficacy of hot compresses (HC), HC plus tobramycin (Tobrex) and HC plus tobramycin/dexamethasone (Tobradex) for chalazia treatment. METHODS: Design: Multicentre, randomized clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01230593). SETTING: Two clinical sites in New York and two clinical sites in Ontario. STUDY POPULATION: A total of 149 patients with one or more chalazia on separate eyelids randomly assigned to receive HC (n = 50), HC plus tobramycin (n = 50) or HC plus tobramycin/dexamethasone (n = 49). INTERVENTION: 4-6 weeks of assigned treatment. Patients were measured for chalazion horizontal width and surveyed for pain and treatment satisfaction levels. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was complete resolution (100% size reduction). Secondary outcomes were size change in millimetres and patient reported pre- and post-treatment pain and satisfaction levels. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, complete resolution occurred in 36 (18%) lesions total, 13 (21%) treated with HC, 12 (16%) with HC plus tobramycin and 11 (18%) with HC plus tobramycin/dexamethasone, with no significant difference between them (p = .78). Individually by paired t-test, there were statistically significant post-treatment mean size differences: HC 1.20 mm (p < 0.001), HC plus tobramycin 1.69 mm (p < .001) and HC plus tobramycin/dexamethasone 1.54 mm (p < 0.001), but no significant difference between them (p = .61). Lesions that completely resolved had a statistically significant lower pretreatment duration (1.5 months) compared to lesions that did not completely resolve (2.2 months) (p = .04). CONCLUSION: Hot compresses (HC) alone or in combination with tobramycin or tobramycin/dexamethasone drops and ointment are all effective first-line treatment options for chalazia. However, physicians may consider moving directly to the use of more invasive therapies, such as incision and curettage or steroid injections, for chalazia that have been present for more than 2 months, as older lesions are less likely to resolve with conservative therapies alone.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".