Effects of Tear Film Instability on Sensory Responses to Corneal Cold, Mechanical, and Chemical Stimuli
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate the effects of tear film instability (TFI) induced by sustained tear exposure (STARE) on sensory responses to corneal cold, mechanical, and chemical stimuli. Methods: Fifteen normal subjects were enrolled. TFI was induced during 10 repeated trials of STARE. Pneumatic cold, mechanical, and chemical stimuli were delivered using a computer-controlled Belmonte esthesiometer on three separate visits. The magnitude of the sensory responses to threshold and suprathreshold (1.25 and 1.50 times threshold levels) stimuli were assessed for intensity, coolness or warmness, irritation and pain, using a 0 (none) to 100 (very strong) scale, before and after STARE trials. Symptoms of ocular discomfort were evaluated using the Current Symptom Questionnaire (CSQ). Repeated measures ANOVA was used for data analysis. Results: Following STARE trials, the intensity and coolness ratings to cooling stimuli decreased (P = 0.043 and 0.044 for intensity and coolness, respectively), while rated irritation to mechanical stimuli was increased (P = 0.024). The CSQ scores also increased regardless of visits (all P < 0.001). Intensity ratings, coolness to room temperature stimuli and irritation to mechanical and chemical stimuli increased for all suprathreshold stimuli with increasing stimulus levels (P ≤ 0.005). Conclusions: Repeated TFI induced by STARE affects neurosensory function of the ocular surface. The decrease in reports of cooling and increase in irritation after repeated TFI suggest a complex interaction of neural mechanisms (particularly nonnociceptive cold and nociceptive mechanical) giving rise to ocular surface sensation in humans.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".