Central Corneal Thickness in Childhood Cataract
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We explored elevated central corneal thickness (CCT) in children with cataracts as possibly reflecting preexisting corneal malformation related to specific cataract morphology. METHODS: All children consecutively seen during the study periods who had cataracts and corneal pachymetry as part of their routine care were enrolled at academic centers in large cities of Canada and the United States. Study data collected included age, sex, CCT, and cataract morphology. Differences among cataract morphology groups with respect to mean CCT measurements were evaluated and compared with a historical control thickness of 558 μm. RESULTS: A total of 96 children were enrolled in this study. The average subject age was 5.1 years, and 55 children (57%) were female. The mean CCT value for all subjects was 566.1 μm. There was little evidence to conclude that the cataract morphology groups differed from each other (P = 0.65) or from controls with respect to CCT. CONCLUSIONS: In children, CCT is likely independent of cataract morphology. This implies that factors other than preoperative malformation are more likely related to elevated CCT observed in children with aphakia and pseudophakia.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".