MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Rheological behavior of commercial artificial tear solutions

2020· article· en· W3111402716 on OpenAlexaffabout
Steve A. Arshinoff, Ilan Hofmann, H. N. Naé

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsArup Group (Canada)University of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRheologyViscoelasticityShear thinningNewtonian fluidShear rateArtificial tearsNon-Newtonian fluidTearsShear stressMaterials scienceMechanicsMedicineComposite materialSurgeryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To measure the rheological behavior of artificial tears to gain insight into the potential role of rheology in predicting the efficacy of artificial tear solutions for the treatment of dry-eye disease (DED). SETTING: Research laboratories of I-MED Pharma, Canada, Rohn and Associates, Inc., New Jersey, and Hydan Technologies, New Jersey. DESIGN: Laboratory investigation. METHODS: Twenty commercially available artificial tear drops were purchased in Canada and the United Kingdom. Rheological measurements of viscosity and normal stress as a function of shear rate were performed at 25°C. RESULTS: For comparison of the rheological behavior, the various artificial tears were sorted into 3 groups: group A, which exhibit significant non-Newtonian shear-thinning behavior; group B, which exhibit moderate non-Newtonian shear-thinning behavior; and group C, which exhibit Newtonian behavior throughout the shear rate range. Results of normal stress difference, N1, as a function of shear rate were concordant with the rheological testing, indicated the viscoelastic nature of the samples in groups A and B, whereas members of group C did not exhibit any elasticity. CONCLUSIONS: The various artificial tear solutions were sorted into groups based on their Newtonian or non-Newtonian behaviors. The results suggest that non-Newtonian solutions should provide better comfort and longer-lasting symptomatic relief for DED. It remains to be confirmed clinically if there is a direct correlation between the rheological behavior of artificial tears and their ability to provide prolonged relief in DED, or if other factors are more important.

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 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 score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score0.481

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cataract & Refractive SurgerySame topicOcular Surface and Contact LensFrench-language works237,207