MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995882643 · doi:10.3928/1081597x-20191024-02

Comparison of Surgically Induced Astigmatism and Corneal Morphological Features Between Femtosecond Laser and Manual Clear Corneal Incisions

2019· article· en· W2995882643 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Refractive Surgery · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntraocular Surgery and Lenses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDioptreOphthalmologyAstigmatismPhacoemulsificationCataract surgerySignificant differenceVisual acuityOptometrySurgeryOpticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To assess corneal morphologic changes and surgically induced astigmatism (SIA) following clear corneal incisions (CCIs) created manually or with the Catalys femtosecond laser (Johnson & Johnson Vision, Santa Ana, CA). METHODS: In this retrospective cohort analysis, patients undergoing femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) or manual cataract surgery between June and September 2018 from a single surgical center in Toronto, Canada, were considered for inclusion. Postoperative corneal astigmatism values were compared to preoperative astigmatism indices to determine the SIA at the postoperative 3-month (POM3) mark using the Alpins vector method. Secondary outcomes included postoperative corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), central corneal thickness (CCT), and CCI morphology parameters. RESULTS: Refractive outcomes from 104 eyes of 61 patients (54 eyes in the manual group and 50 eyes in the FLACS group) were included. There was no significant difference in POM3 SIA (manual: 0.45 ± 0.28 diopters [D], FLACS: 0.57 ± 0.46 D, P = .11); however, a significantly larger SIA was noted in the FLACS cohort at postoperative 1 week (P = .02) and 1 month (P = .04). FLACS led to a significantly smaller POM3 CCI thickness (P = .006), and CCI position was comparable between the two techniques (P = .44). There were no significant differences between groups in CDVA (P = .19), CCT thickness (P = .20), or phacoemulsification time (P = .59). CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in SIA between FLACS and manual cataract surgery at POM3. With a significantly smaller CCI thickness seen in FLACS cases, and a comparable CCI position, the reason for the increased SIA following laser CCIs in the early postoperative period was unclear. [J Refract Surg. 2019;35(12):796-802.].

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.610

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.299 · 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