MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993460995 · doi:10.1097/icl.0000000000000683

Deposition of Fluorescently Tagged Lysozyme on Contact Lenses in a Physiological Blink Model

2019· article· en· W2993460995 on OpenAlexaff
Chau‐Minh Phan, Han Qiao, Alan Yee, Lyndon Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueEye & Contact Lens Science & Clinical Practice · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLysozymeCLs upper limitsContact lensBiomedical engineeringSilicone hydrogelLens (geology)MicroscopeDeposition (geology)FluoresceinConfocalMaterials scienceOphthalmologyChemistryOpticsMedicinePathologyBiochemistryBiologyFluorescence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To visualize the deposition of fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) lysozyme on daily disposable contact lenses (CLs) using a novel blink model. METHODS: Three daily disposable conventional hydrogel CLs (etafilcon A, omafilcon A, and nelfilcon A) and three silicone hydrogel CLs (delefilcon A, senofilcon A, and somofilcon A) were evaluated in the study. The CLs were mounted onto a novel blink model and exposed to an artificial tear solution containing FITC lysozyme for 2 and 10 hr. The flow rate and blink speed were set to 1 μL/min and 6 blinks/min, respectively. After the incubation period, a 5-mm-diameter disc was punched out from the center of the lens and mounted on a microscope slide. The slides were imaged using the Zeiss 510 Meta confocal laser scanning microscope, which scanned the lens from the front to the back surface at 5-μm increments. RESULTS: There was an increase in deposition of FITC lysozyme for all lens types with increasing incubation time (P<0.05), with the exception of somofilcon A, which did not show statistical significance between 2 and 10 hr (P>0.05). The conventional hydrogel CLs deposited higher amounts of FITC lysozyme than the silicone hydrogel CLs (P<0.001), with etafilcon A depositing the highest at all time points (P<0.05). Interestingly, at the 2-hr incubation time, most CLs showed a higher amount of deposition at the front surface than the back surface of the lens. In particular, etafilcon A showed preferred deposition at the front surface at all time points. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that there is differential deposition at the front surface of the CL, which is exposed to the prelens tear film, compared with the back surface of the CL, which is exposed to the postlens tear film. Therefore, it may be beneficial to design CL materials with differing surface properties for the front and back surfaces of the CL to enhance interactions with the tear film and ocular surface.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEye & Contact Lens Science & Clinical PracticeSame topicOcular Surface and Contact LensFrench-language works237,207