MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281632514 · doi:10.1088/2058-8585/ac73ca

Increased sensitivity of smart contact lenses for continuous intraocular pressure measurement using ring-shaped design

2022· article· en· W4281632514 on OpenAlexafffund
Rick Helgason, Yongjun Lai

Bibliographic record

VenueFlexible and Printed Electronics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsStrain gaugeMaterials scienceLens (geology)Sensitivity (control systems)Piezoresistive effectContact lensRing (chemistry)GlaucomaIntraocular pressureOpticsOptoelectronicsBiomedical engineeringOphthalmologyComposite materialElectronic engineeringEngineeringChemistryMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Smart contact lenses with continuous intraocular pressure (IOP) sensors are emerging as an alternate system for monitoring the progression and treatment of glaucoma. To date, such sensors have primarily consisted of strain gauges embedded on traditional contact lenses. This work presents a novel smart contact lens design consisting of a ring-shaped contact lens with a piezoresistive strain gauge. We observe an increase in IOP measurement sensitivity of the device with an increase inner diameter of the ring. Ring-shaped sensors with an inner diameter of 2.7 mm show an increase in sensitivity of up to 7.1% and ring-shaped sensors with an inner diameter of 4.7 mm show an increase in sensitivity of up to 17.9%. It is expected that by incorporating a ring-shaped lens, other strain gauge-based smart contact lenses in the literature would experience similar increase in sensitivity.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFlexible and Printed ElectronicsSame topicGlaucoma and retinal disordersFrench-language works237,207