Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To assess the incidence of steroid induced rise in intra-ocular pressurein different group of patients. Place and duration of study: The study was conducted in thedepartment of ophthalmology Akhtar Saeed Trust Teaching Hospital of Akhtar Saeed Medicaland Dental College Lahore and Continental Medical College Lahore from Jan 2009 to Oct 2010.Material and Methods: Three groups were formulated in which group A comprised of normalpopulation with no ocular disease, group B included patients with vernal keratoconjunctivitiswhile group C comprised of chronic simple glaucoma patients with controlled intraocularpressure. Dexamethasone 0.1% eye drops were used four times daily for four weeks and patientswere evaluated weekly in terms of IOP monitoring after which they were labeled as either low ornon-responders, moderate responders or high responders. Results: In group A 40% of thepatients showed rise in IOP, group B showed 95% rise in IOP and the response in group C caseswas 100%. Conclusions: Topical steroids result in significant rise in IOP therefore carefulmonitoring should be done in all patients on corticosteroids.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.009 |
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".