COVID-19 Recommendations From Ophthalmic and Plastic Reconstructive Surgery Societies Worldwide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has brought unprecedented challenges for oculoplastic surgeons worldwide, in terms of care delivery, medical equipment and at-risk patient management. To date, there are no centralized or compiled international COVID-19 guidelines for oculoplastic surgeons. METHODS: We examined COVID-19 guidelines published by oculoplastic societies worldwide. All countries around the world were initially considered in this study, but only 9 oculoplastic societies met the inclusion criteria: (1) publicly available guidelines displayed on the oculoplastic society's website, or (2) guidelines received from the oculoplastic society after contacting them twice using the contact information on their website. RESULTS: The 9 oculoplastic societies examined include: the American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the British Oculoplastic Surgery Society, the Canadian Society of Oculoplastic Surgery, the European Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, la Sociedad Española de Cirugía Plástica Ocular y Orbitaria, la Asociación Colombiana de Cirugía Plastica Ocular, the Asia Pacific Society of Ophthalmic Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, the Oculoplastics Association of India, and the Philippine Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. They all agree that urgent procedures should not be delayed, while non-necessary procedures (including all elective clinic services) should be postponed. When adequate protective equipment is available, oculoplastic surgeons must treat urgent cases. Eight out of 9 societies have provided recommendations on personal protective equipment use in order to prevent the spread of COVID-19 and to adequately protect mucous membranes. Other recommendations provided by certain societies are related to shelter in place measures, hand hygiene and surface disinfection protocols, patient triage, and thyroid eye disease management. CONCLUSIONS: All 9 societies with published recommendations have provided valuable recommendations to their members, regarding urgency of care and infection control solutions (personal protective equipment, hand hygiene, telemedicine, and social isolation).
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 | 0.018 | 0.062 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.008 |
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".