MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391982985 · doi:10.1055/a-2272-6077

Corneal Neurotization: Essentials for The Facial Paralysis Surgeon

2024· article· en· W4391982985 on OpenAlexaff
Jordan R. Crabtree, Chilando Mulenga, Khoa Tran, Arif Hussain, Charline S. Boente, Asim Ali, Konstantin Feinberg, Gregory H. Borschel

Bibliographic record

VenueFacial Plastic Surgery · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFacial paralysisParalysisSurgeryOphthalmology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deficits in corneal innervation lead to neurotrophic keratopathy (NK). NK is frequently associated with facial palsy, and corneal damage can be accelerated by facial palsy deficits. Corneal nerves are important regulators of limbal stem cells, which play a critical role in epithelial maintenance and healing. Nonsurgical treatments of NK have undergone recent innovation, and growth factors implicated in corneal epithelial renewal are a promising therapeutic avenue. However, surgical intervention with corneal neurotization (CN) remains the only definitive treatment of NK. CN involves the transfer of unaffected sensory donor nerve branches to the affected cornea, and a variety of donor nerves and approaches have been described. CN can be performed in a direct or indirect manner; employ the supraorbital, supratrochlear, infraorbital, or great auricular nerves; and utilize autograft, allograft, or nerve transfer alone. Unfortunately, comparative studies of these factors are limited due to the procedure's novelty and varied recovery timelines after CN. Regardless of the chosen approach, CN has been shown to be a safe and effective procedure to restore corneal sensation and improve visual acuity in patients with NK.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFacial Plastic SurgerySame topicOcular Surface and Contact LensFrench-language works237,207