MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406121063 · doi:10.7759/cureus.77102

Long-Term Effectiveness of Scleral Lens Treatment in the Management of Keratoconus: A Systematic Review

2025· review· en· W4406121063 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adeel Mushtaq, Isaamuddin Alvi

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCorneal surgery and disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineKeratoconusVisual acuityCochrane LibraryMEDLINEQuality of life (healthcare)OphthalmologyOptometryRandomized controlled trialSurgeryCorneaNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This systematic review evaluates the long-term effectiveness of scleral lenses in improving visual outcomes, patient satisfaction, and safety in patients with keratoconus. A systematic search of six databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE) was performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The inclusion criteria included studies with more than or equal to three months of follow-up, included a minimum of 20 keratoconus patients, published after year 2020 and outcomes reporting visual acuity, comfort or quality of life. Methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Murad et al. case series tool. Five studies (463 eyes) met the inclusion criteria. Scleral lenses consistently improved best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) across studies, with visual gains from baseline logMAR 0.50-0.53 to post-treatment logMAR 0.08-0.09. Significant improvements in vision-related quality of life (National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ) scores) were observed in validated assessments. Complications were infrequently reported but included lens handling issues (10.4%-63%), fogging (58%), and physiological events (e.g., corneal epitheliopathy). Long-term follow-up indicated that 14.6% of the patients experienced worsening visual acuity due to keratoconus progression. Methodological quality was variable, with limitations including variable outcome reporting and limited follow-up duration. Scleral lenses provide substantial and sustained improvements in visual acuity and quality of life for keratoconus patients, particularly those with advanced disease. However, the evidence is limited by methodological shortcomings and a lack of long-term controlled studies. Future research should prioritise randomised trials with standardised reporting and longer follow-up to better assess complications and durability of outcomes.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.010
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicCorneal surgery and disordersFrench-language works237,207