Scleral-fixated and iris-fixated intraocular lens implantation or fixation:meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scleral fixation and iris fixation are common intraocular lens (IOL) implantation techniques performed because of zonulopathy. There is a lack of consensus regarding their comparative efficacy and safety. This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety outcomes after scleral-fixated (SF) vs iris-fixated (IF) IOL implantation or fixation in adults. A systematic literature search was conducted on Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL from 2005 to 2020. 785 eyes from 2 randomized controlled trials and 9 nonrandomized studies were included. There was no significant difference in the mean corrected distance visual acuity at the final follow-up ( P = .52) or absolute change in spherical equivalent ( P = .88) between SF IOL and IF IOL implantation. The incidence of vitreous hemorrhage was significantly higher in the SF IOL group (risk ratio = 3.66, 95% CI, 1.16-11.55, P = .03). There were no differences in visual acuity and refractive outcomes between SF IOL and IF IOL implantation or fixation. Trade-offs in complications exist between the 2 techniques.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".