MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404121017 · doi:10.24908/qap.v1i2.18100

World's First Full Eye Transplant

2024· article· en· W4404121017 on OpenAlexaff
Harini Arulvarathan, Yasmine Abossi

Bibliographic record

VenueQapsule Queen s Undergraduate Health Sciences Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan and Tissue Transplantation Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptometryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The transplant of a complete eyeball, with its blood supply and the critical optic nerve that connects it to the brain, has been seen as an impossible objective in the fight against blindness.1On May 28, 2023, surgeons at NYU Langone Health made history by performing the world's first complete human eye transplant.1 The patient, Aaron James, was a 46-year-old veteran from Arkansas who had lost most of his face and one eye in an accident involving high-voltage power lines.1 Upon learning of James' situation, face transplant specialists at NYU Langone Health proposed not just a partial face transplant but also a whole-eye transplant, a procedure that had never been performed before.2 More than 140 surgeons, nurses, and healthcare workers arrived at NYU Langone on the day of James' procedure and were divided into two teams, one removing the sections of James' face that would be replaced with donor tissue and the other removing the donor's face and eyeball.2 The ground-breaking procedure lasted 21 hours.2 Though James may not be able to see out of the transplanted eye, he is recovering well after the dual transplant.2 The donated eye appears to be in good health, revealing unparalleled insights into how the human eye can heal.1

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.207

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0620.009

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQapsule Queen s Undergraduate Health Sciences JournalSame topicOrgan and Tissue Transplantation ResearchFrench-language works237,207