MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3164296232 · doi:10.1177/11206721211020648

Vision related quality of life of patients with keratoconus after keratoplasty at a Tertiary Eye Hospital in Saudi Arabia

2021· article· en· W3164296232 on OpenAlexaff
Bader Alqahtani, Samar A. Al-Swailem, Khabir Ahmad, Rajiv Khandekar

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Ophthalmology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCorneal surgery and disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKeratoconusMedicineOptometryOphthalmologyEye careCorneal transplantationTertiary levelCorneaPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To assess the vision-related quality of life (VQoL) for patients with advanced keratoconus (KC) after primary keratoplasty. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study, undertaken at the King Khaled Eye Specialist Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, in December 2015. Adults (aged 22–75 years) were interviewed via telephone with regard to their VQoL, on the average, 5 years after undergoing primary keratoplasty for advanced KC. VQoL was measured using the Visual Functioning Index (VF-14, Arabic version). The relationship between VQoL and different demographic and clinical factors was evaluated using linear regression. Results: Ninety-five adults participated in the study (54.7 % males; mean age at the interview = 32.05 ± 7.18 years). Eighty-seven (91.6%) of them had undergone PKP. The overall mean VF-14 score was 86.19% (SD: 12.91). VF-14 score was significantly lower for individuals with higher log average K (beta coefficient, −28.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], −55.59 to −1.04; p = 0.042) and hazy graft (beta coefficient, −12.76; 95% CI, −21.16 to −4.36; p = 0.003) adjusting for the effect of keratoplasty technique and BCVA in the better eye at the last follow up. Conclusion: This study suggests that most patients with advanced keratoconus had satisfactory VQoL after primary keratoplasty. Certain subgroups may benefit less substantially than others and would need a particular attention.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of OphthalmologySame topicCorneal surgery and disordersFrench-language works237,207