Cataract and glaucoma surgery: Endoscopic cyclophotocoagulation versus trabeculectomy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of endoscopic cyclophotocoagulation (ECP) versus trabeculectomy with mitomycin C (trab) in combination with cataract surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated the 6-month results of patients undergoing phacoemulsification (phaco) with either ECP or trab. The primary outcome was mean intraocular pressure (IOP) at 6 months; secondary outcomes were change in glaucoma medications, visual acuity, intraocular inflammation, and postoperative complications. Complete success was a target IOP of <21 mmHg and >6 mmHg without glaucoma medications. Qualified success was target IOP achieved through glaucoma medications. RESULTS: < 0.05). The rate of postoperative complications was not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSION: At 6 months, ECP-phaco demonstrated similar improvements in IOP and visual acuity compared to trab-phaco. However, ECP-phaco patients had higher incidences of immediate postoperative IOP spikes and anterior chamber inflammation as well as requiring additional medications postoperatively.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it