Knowledge, Attitude and Awareness towards Corneal Donation in Aseer Region, Saudi Arabia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Corneal transplantation is the mainstay procedure performed for sight restoration in patients with corneal blindness, which can be caused by infection, corneal dystrophy, degenerative disorders such as keratoconus or traumatic causes. Most corneal transplants in Saudi Arabia are performed using imported corneas. Aims: To determine the level of knowledge and awareness and the factors affecting corneal donation in Aseer region, Saudi Arabia. Subjects and Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional approach was used targeting the population of Aseer region aged 18 years and above. The data were collected using electronic self-administered questionnaire. The tool covered the participants’ biodemographic data, knowledge related questions and willingness of corneal donation and factors affecting such attitudes. Results: Of the 641 participants, 66.1% were males, 47.6% were in the age group 20 – 30 years and 19.2% claimed to have enough knowledge about corneal donation. The mean knowledge score (SD) was 2.13 (1.757) out of 8. Regarding participants’ attitude, 26.7% were willing to donate their own cornea. The willingness was significantly associated with good level of knowledge (p = 0.008). Females were more inclined to donate their corneas than males (30.9% vs 24.5%, p = 0.025). Conclusion: The study revealed a low level of knowledge of corneal donation in Aseer region, Saudi Arabia. Approximately one quarter of the participants reported willingness of corneal donation. Lack of knowledge was the main barrier, as it was reported by almost two thirds. Key words: Cornea, Donation, Awareness, Penetrating Keratoplasty, Saudi Arabia
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".