Update on Bowman layer transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Bowman layer transplantation is a novel technique that may stabilize progressive ectatic corneal changes in eyes with keratoconus, which are too steep or too thin for ultraviolet corneal crosslinking or intracorneal ring segments. In this way, patients can maintain stable vision with contact lenses, and avoid or postpone more invasive corneal transplants, such as penetrating keratoplasty or deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty. This review aims to summarize the currently available literature on Bowman layer transplantation. RECENT FINDINGS: Bowman layer transplantation seems to be a promising, minimally invasive procedure for managing advanced keratoconus with a reported 5-year success rate of 84%. The procedure allows patients to maintain acceptable visual acuity with glasses or contact lens correction. Although graft preparation and surgical technique can be challenging, adaptation of technologies, such as femtosecond laser and intraoperative anterior segment optical coherence tomography, may help overcome these barriers to enable Bowman layer transplantation to become a more widely adopted procedure. SUMMARY: Bowman layer transplantation may offer an alternative, less invasive treatment option for eyes with advanced, progressive keratoconus.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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".