MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3149239611 · doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2004.08.013

Capsulotomy diameter mark

2004· letter· en· W3149239611 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rodney I. Kellen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery · 2004
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntraocular Surgery and Lenses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapsulorhexisPhacoemulsificationIntraocular lensOphthalmologyMedicineSurgeryOptometryVisual acuity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I was pleased to read the article from Wallace1 describing a simple technique to guide the capsulorhexis tear to produce a round, centered, and predictably sized anterior continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis (CCC). I have successfully used this technique for the past 18 months. It is particularly useful when the pupil dilates eccentrically and the usual cues to center the CCC are absent. In addition to reducing the incidence of posterior capsule opacification, ensuring 360-degree overlap of the optic by the anterior capsule rim reduces the incidence of photopsias from square-edged intraocular lenses (IOLs) by encasing the IOL edge within the capsular envelope. The stability of a single-piece acrylic IOL with soft haptics is also enhanced. The anterior capsule opening is predictably sized and is large enough to maximize the available optic to view the peripheral retina. The corneal mark technique can also be used in patients who have had peribulbar or retrobulbar blocks. A modified optical zone marker with 4 prongs at 90 degrees to each other and a total length of 11.0 mm is used to center the marker by aligning the tips of the prongs with the limbus. To ensure this technique's success, the corneal plane and the anterior capsule plane must be parallel with a focal plane of the operating microscope to avoid parallax errors. The surgeon must be careful not to confuse the corneal mark with the anterior capsule rim at the time of IOL implantation. Rodney I. Kellen MB, BCH, MMED, FRCOPTH, FRCSC Winnepeg, Manitoba, Canada

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.007
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.245 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations5
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cataract & Refractive SurgerySame topicIntraocular Surgery and LensesFrench-language works237,207