MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408970880 · doi:10.1097/iop.0000000000002937

Reconstruction of Bilateral Upper Eyelid Colobomas Using a Vertical Temporal Advancement Flap

2025· article· en· W4408970880 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Asem T. Mustafa, Kenneth V. Cahill, Llwyatt K. Hofer, Jill A. Foster

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicOcular Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEyelidSurgeryAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A male infant born at full term presented with bilateral upper eyelid colobomas, absent upper puncta, and fusion of the eyelids to the globes. He was admitted for management of bilateral exposure keratopathy and a central corneal ulcer in the right eye. Further examination revealed multiple congenital abnormalities, such as penile torsion, unusual hair growth pattern on the forehead, bifid nasal tip, and hypertelorism. Genetic testing confirmed a diagnosis of Manitoba oculo-tricho-anal syndrome. Because conservative management of the ocular surface was insufficient, bilateral upper eyelid reconstruction surgery was performed 5 days after birth using a vertical temporal advancement flap. At 6-month follow-up, there was excellent eyelid movement and closure with no corneal exposure. This case report describes the clinical findings of a rare bilateral upper eyelid defect and shares an innovative reconstructive technique that readers could mimic if presented with similar congenital upper eyelid defects.

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: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOphthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive SurgerySame topicOcular Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207