The effect of recurrent povidone-iodine usage on conjunctival flora in diabetic patients undergoing intravitreal injections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose was to evaluate the change in the microbiological profile of diabetic patients undergoing intravitreal injections for diabetic macular edema. Methods: Patients were included in this prospective study when referred for the first time for intravitreal injection to treat diabetic macular edema. For each patient, conjunctival cultures were taken from the lower fornix of each eye prior to the povidone-iodine application and the intravitreal injection. An additional culture was taken from the treated eye 20 min after the injection. The same culture protocol was used for the two following injections of these patients. A later conjunctival culture was also taken a month after the last injection. Results: Twenty-one eyes of 21 patients were included. The mean duration of diabetes was 13.7 ± 7.9 years. Prior to the first intravitreal injection, 33% of cultures were positive. Prior to the third intravitreal injection, 26% of cultures were positive ( p = 0.63), and 1 month after the last injection, 18% of cultures were positive ( p = 0.495). The mean HbA1C was 8.1% ± 1.7%. HbA1C of patients with positive cultures was 8.0% ± 1.1% at the first intravitreal injection and 8.2% ± 1.0% at the third intravitreal injection. This was compared with HBA1C in eyes with negative cultures: 7.4% ± 1.2% ( p = 0.45) and 7.1% ± 1.0% ( p = 0.14), respectively. Conclusion: Repeated intravitreal injection for diabetic macular edema with application of povidone-iodine 5% in diabetic patients did not lead to a significant change in the percentage of positive conjunctival cultures. Patients with higher HbA1C had a slight, non-statistically significant trend for positive cultures.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".