Patient-Reported Vision-Related Quality of Life After Boston Type I Keratoprosthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine patient-reported vision-related quality of life (VR-QoL) after Boston type I keratoprosthesis (BKPro) and its determinants. METHODS: A cross-sectional study including consecutive consenting BKPro patients was conducted. The French National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25 measured postoperative VR-QoL. Medical charts were retrospectively reviewed for demographics, ocular comorbidities, indication for surgery, postoperative visual acuity (VA), and complications. Univariate analyses were used to identify VR-QoL determinants. Multivariate linear regression was additionally performed for patients operated unilaterally, using VR-QoL as the dependent variable and age, sex, and postoperative VA as covariates. P < 0.05 indicated statistical significance. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients, aged 63 ± 13 years, with a mean follow-up of 54 ± 19 months, were included. VR-QoL was measured 53 ± 18 months postoperatively. "Composite" VR-QoL scores in patients with unilateral (n = 51) and bilateral (n = 12) BKPro were 65 ± 23 and 63 ± 19, respectively, and did not significantly differ between the 2 groups (P = 0.71). In patients with unilateral BKPro, VR-QoL was determined by postoperative VA in the better eye, which was the contralateral nonoperated eye in most cases. Achieved vision in the operated eye contributed to VR-QoL when vision in the contralateral nonoperated eye was poorer. In the bilateral BKPro group, VR-QoL was determined by postoperative VA in the better eye and the number of ongoing complications. CONCLUSIONS: Five-year VR-QoL scores were lower in BKPro patients compared with healthy cohorts reported in the literature and were similar after unilateral and bilateral BKPro surgery. The main determinant of postoperative VR-QoL was postoperative vision in the better eye.
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) | 0.002 | 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".