MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213051663 · doi:10.1097/ico.0000000000003004

The Effect of COVID-19 on Corneal Donor Volumes and Eye Bank Processes: An Analysis From the Eye Bank of Canada (Ontario Division)

2022· article· en· W4213051663 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueCornea · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal and Optic Conditions
Canadian institutionsTrillium Therapeutics (Canada)Bank of CanadaTrillium Health CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEye bankEconomic shortageTissue bankCorneal transplantationWest bankCornea

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: With the rise in COVID-19 cases, the Eye Bank of Canada (Ontario Division), the largest eye bank in Canada, was faced with challenges related to ocular donor suitability which resulted in tissue shortages after the first wave of COVID-19 cases in Ontario, Canada. This article aims to analyze the impact of COVID-19 on ocular tissue donation and transplant surgeries. METHODS: Trends in ocular donations in 2020 and the transplant rates were compared with the data from the previous year, as a benchmark of normal eye bank activity. RESULTS: Ocular donor volumes decreased during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (March-June 2020) by 65% as compared to the same period in 2019. By the end of the year 2020, this had resulted in a total reduction of 29% of ocular donor volumes as compared to 2019. The ocular transplant surgery volumes in the year 2020 decreased by 32% compared to the previous year, mostly secondary to elective surgery shutdown during the first wave. Because of tissue shortages, the Eye Bank of Canada (Ontario Division) had to import 24 corneas from the United States and cancel 7 surgeries in the year 2020. CONCLUSIONS: The decline in ocular tissue donor volumes and transplant surgery was a result of an interplay of causes related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Most importantly, ruling out of COVID-19 carriers, lockdown measures affecting tissue retrieval processes, and shutdown of elective surgery were the 3 major factors accounting for tissue shortages and surgical volume reductions.

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)0.000
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 score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.256
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 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCorneaSame topicRetinal and Optic ConditionsFrench-language works237,207