MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389488958 · doi:10.3928/1081597x-20231101-01

Angle Kappa Influence on Multifocal IOL Outcomes

2023· article· en· W4389488958 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Refractive Surgery · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsMuscular Dystrophy Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKappaMedicineCohen's kappaOphthalmologyMultifocal intraocular lensSubjective refractionOptometryRefractionVisual acuityRefractive errorMathematicsPhacoemulsificationOpticsGeometryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To characterize angle kappa and study the relationship between preoperative angle kappa and postoperative refractive accuracy, visual outcomes, and patient satisfaction in a large population of eyes with multifocal intraocular lens (MIOL) implantation. Methods: A comprehensive electronic medical record chart review of 26,470 consecutive eyes that underwent immediate sequential bilateral cataract or refractive lens exchange with MIOLs was conducted. The primary outcome measures were postoperative monocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), manifest refraction sphere and cylinder, spherical equivalent (SEQ), defocus equivalent (DEQ), subjective quality of vision at near, intermediate, and distance, and the likelihood of recommending the procedure. Relationships between preoperative angle kappa and postoperative outcomes were assessed with Pearson correlations. Results: Angle kappa followed a right-skewed normal distribution ( R 2 = 0.99) with a mean ± standard deviation of 0.64 ± 0.27 mm. No clinically meaningful relationship was found between preoperative angle kappa and postoperative sphere, cylinder, SEQ, and DEQ, all with R 2 ⩽ 0.0005. Similarly, there was no clinically meaningful relationship between preoperative angle kappa and postoperative UDVA ( R 2 = 0.001), postoperative satisfaction for near, intermediate, and distance vision (all R 2 ⩽ 0.0023), or for recommending the MIOL surgery to friends and relatives ( R 2 = 0.0000). Conclusions: Preoperative angle kappa does not have a predictive clinical impact on postoperative MIOL visual outcomes, refractive accuracy, or subjective patient satisfaction. Angle kappa as a single variable cannot be used to determine MIOL candidacy. [ J Refract Surg . 2023;39(12):840–849.]

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.370

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.335 · 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