Ciclodestrucción y ciclofotocoagulacion ¿dónde estamos ahora?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resumen La ciclodestrucción es una técnica que se reservaba para glaucomas que no se controlaban con tratamiento médico y quirúrgico y que tenían un escaso potencial visual. Durante el siglo pasado se fueron desarrollando las técnicas de ciclodestrucción, entre ellas la ciclofotocoagulación y se generalizó el uso de la ciclofotocoagulación transescleral de contacto con onda continua de láser de diodo (CW-TS-CPC). En las últimas décadas se ha introducido la ciclofotocoagulación transescleral de contacto con micropulsos de láser de diodo (MP-TS-CPC). Revisamos las técnicas de ciclodestrucción desde sus inicios y estas 2 técnicas de ciclofotocoagulación con láser de diodo que son las más utilizadas en la actualidad: cómo se realizan, sus mecanismos de actuación y su efectividad y eficacia. Además, revisamos la comparación entre ambas y con otras técnicas.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".