MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221158459

Phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation in a Canada lynx with phacoclastic uveitis.

2022· article· en· W4221158459 on OpenAlexaffabout
Geneviève Lavallée, Stephanie Osinchuk, Dennilyn Parker, Marina Leis, Lynne S Sandmeyer

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVeterinary Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhacoemulsificationMedicineIntraocular lensUveitisOphthalmologyFundus (uterus)Visual acuity
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

was referred to the ophthalmology service at the University of Saskatchewan with a 7-month history of cataract and chronic phacoclastic uveitis secondary to penetrating trauma from a lynx claw. Ophthalmic examination of the right eye revealed a corneal scar, marked aqueous flare, extensive fibrovascular membranes extending from the iris to the lens, anterior and posterior synechiae, immature cataract, and anterior vitritis; the fundus was not visible. Phacoemulsification surgery and intraocular lens implantation using a custom lens of D+46 and 14 mm (An-vision, West Jordan, Utah, USA) was performed. Post-operative medications included sub-conjunctival injections of atropine, cefazolin, and triamcinolone, and oral doxycycline and prednisolone. At the 5-month follow-up, the uveitis was controlled, and a normal fundus was visualized; at 21 mo, the eye remained comfortable and visual. This is the first case report to describe phacoemulsification in a wild felid as a treatment for a traumatic cataract and severe phacoclastic uveitis. Key clinical message: Despite chronic phacoclastic uveitis, phacoemulsification surgery can provide a positive outcome for mature wild felids with traumatic lens rupture, even when topical treatment cannot be administered.

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)0.000
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 score0.231
Threshold uncertainty score0.805

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicVeterinary Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207