Comparison of Binocular Vision Parameters in Patients With Irregular Corneas Corrected With Spectacles Versus Rigid Contact Lenses (RGP, Rose K, & Scleral Lenses)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To compare Binocular vision (BV) parameters between spectacle and rigid lenses among patients with irregular cornea Design: Comparative prospective study Method: All the binocular vision parameters were evaluated on two different occasions in 30 irregular corneas (22 Keratoconus, 3 pellucid marginal degeneration, 2 post-LASIK ectasia and 3 Post graft) patients who wore contact lenses and single vision spectacle had average age of 26±8.0 years. The binocular vision parameters measured in the study were; near the point of accommodation (NPA), accommodative facility, near negative and positive fusional vergence, distance negative fusional vergence (NFV) and positive fusional vergence (PFV), vergence facility, near the point of convergence (NPC), negative relative accommodation (NRA), and positive relative accommodation (PRA), AC: A ratio, and stereo acuity. Result: A total 60 subjects were participated in the study in which 30 was aged match control group & 30 patients with irregular cornea. When a patient with an irregular cornea switched from single vision glasses to rigid contact lenses, their monocular and binocular logMAR distant and near visual acuity (VA), as well as stereoacuity, improved dramatically (P <.05).The stereoacuity with spectacle was 400±60 sec of arc and with rigid contact lens 140±30 sec of arc which were statistically significant (p<0.05). Near horizontal phoria was less with rigid contact lens: -7.50±2.71 as compared to spectacle: -9.67±3.17, but this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.06). . The clinical findings of patient with rigid contact lens were Distance phoria: -4.83±3.35; near phoria: -7.50±2.71 (Negative values in the Phoria indicate exodeviations) and; PRA: 7.22±0.50; stereoacuity: 140.0±30 which were statistically significant compared to aged match control group. (p<0.05). Conclusion: Binocular & monocular logMAR visual acuity, near phoria and stereopsis improve from single vision spectacles to rigid contact lenses in patient with irregular cornea and also all binocular vision parameters with rigid contact lenses among irregular cornea remained poorer than aged matched control subjects.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".