MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944678565 · doi:10.15353/cjo.78.449

Case study: Use of contact lenses to manage complications following combined corneal cross-linking and topography-guided photorefractive keratectomy for pellucid marginal degeneration

2016· article· en· W2944678565 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Debby Yeung, Luigina Sorbara

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian journal of optometry/CJO. Canadian journal of optometry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCorneal surgery and disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotorefractive keratectomyMedicineContact lensOphthalmologyGLAREVisual rehabilitationCorneal topographyPatient satisfactionOptometryKeratomileusisCorneaSurgeryVisual acuityMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This case report describes two significant long-term complications experienced by a patient following treatment for pellucid marginal degeneration (PMD). Two years after undergoing a combination of topography-guided photorefractive keratectomy (T-PRK) and corneal collagen cross-linking (CXL) procedures, the patient continued to experience glare and dryness associated with persistent stromal haze and dry eye. These procedures resulted in dissatisfaction with the final outcome, which led the patient to seek contact lens correction. Management of the symptomatic ocular sequelae with specialty soft toric contact lenses designed for irregular corneas supported her visual rehabilitation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian journal of optometry/CJO. Canadian journal of optometrySame topicCorneal surgery and disordersFrench-language works237,207