MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385961551 · doi:10.15547/tjs.2022.04.009

OCULAR SURFACE COMFORT AND FACE MASKS: DRY EYE EPIDEMIC AMID COVID 19 PANDEMIC?

2022· article· en· W4385961551 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
V. Ivancheva, A. Lyubenov A. Lyubenov

Bibliographic record

VenueTrakia Journal of Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal and Optic Conditions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFace masksCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicMedicineEye protectionSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakOptometryQuarter (Canadian coin)Disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The purpose of this research is evaluating the effects of wearing face masks on ocular health among medical students in the current COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The study includes 147 students in total, all are from Medical University in Pleven. They were interviewed anonymously about their eye health and comfort during periods of wearing face masks. RESULTS: Findings of the study highlighted that wearing face masks for prolonged periods decreases eye comfort levels. Most common presenting complaints were dryness, grittiness, scratchiness, soreness, burning and watering. Almost one quarter of interviewed students sometimes experienced eye fatigue or ocular discomfort. Severity of symptoms was described as “tolerable” in 30.8%, “uncomfortable” in 13%. Of the asked students 25.4% answered that their symptoms were getting worse while being with a protective face mask. In terms of longest uninterrupted time wearing face masks, results show: almost 20% reported more than 5 hours without break. CONCLUSIONS: As a conclusion of this study, it was observed that eye health and dry eye symptoms among medical students was adversely affected by wearing full face covering protective masks during the pandemic situation, which interferes with the quality of life and is an emerging public health issue.

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)0.002
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 score0.224
Threshold uncertainty score0.494

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrakia Journal of SciencesSame topicRetinal and Optic ConditionsFrench-language works237,207