MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389197737 · doi:10.2147/opto.s433899

Medmont Meridia™: Much More Than a Corneal Topographer

2023· article· en· W4389197737 on OpenAlexaff
Daddi Fadel

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Optometry · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContact lensCorneal topographyPalpebral fissureOptometryComputer scienceMedicineOphthalmologyCornea

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, advanced diagnostic instruments have become widely available in optometric practices, offering various functions that optimize clinical information gathering. This article focuses on the Medmont Meridia™, a state-of-the-art multipurpose diagnostic device with corneal topography and cutting-edge features. Corneal topography is pivotal in the early diagnosis of corneal disorders, determining baseline ocular surface assessment, helping in contact lens fitting, and monitoring ocular health over time. The Medmont Meridia boasts Placido-disc-based imaging with extensive corneal coverage. Furthermore, the Meridia accurately measures the horizontal visible iris diameter, pupil diameter, and palpebral fissure width, which assists in making contact lens parameter decisions. Additionally, it offers sagittal height data for scleral lens design and first lens selection, streamlining the fitting process. Beyond its topography capabilities, the Meridia excels as a comprehensive dry eye assessment tool. With features like tear meniscus height, tear film surface quality, and meibography capabilities, it aids in diagnosing dry eye and monitoring its progression. The device also provides customizable dry eye reports with integrated grading scales and questionnaires, making dry eye management, patient education, and compliance more accessible. In conclusion, the Medmont Meridia consolidates a multitude of examination tools in a single instrument, enhancing practice efficiency and elevating patient care and communication. Its versatility and accuracy make it an invaluable asset in optometric practices worldwide.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0790.031

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.377 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical OptometrySame topicOcular Surface and Contact LensFrench-language works237,207