TFOS Lifestyle Report Executive Summary: A Lifestyle Epidemic - Ocular Surface Disease
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Tear Film & Ocular Surface Society (TFOS) Workshop entitled 'A Lifestyle Epidemic: Ocular Surface Disease' was a global initiative undertaken to establish the direct and indirect impacts of everyday lifestyle choices and challenges on ocular surface health. This article presents an executive summary of the evidence-based conclusions and recommendations of the 10-part TFOS Lifestyle Workshop report. Lifestyle factors described within the report include contact lenses, cosmetics, digital environment, elective medications and procedures, environmental conditions, lifestyle challenges, nutrition, and societal challenges. For each topic area, the current literature was summarized and appraised in a narrative-style review and the answer to a key topic-specific question was sought using systematic review methodology. The TFOS Lifestyle Workshop report was published in its entirety in the April 2023 and July 2023 issues of The Ocular Surface journal. Links to downloadable versions of the document and supplementary material, including report translations, are available on the TFOS website: http://www.TearFilm.org.
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.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.004 |
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 it