MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412768212 · doi:10.1097/icl.0000000000001199

Profilometry-Guided Scleral Lenses Improve Visual Acuity and Reduce Ocular Aberrations in Irregular Corneas: A Retrospective Case Series

2025· article· en· W4412768212 on OpenAlexaff
Vincenzo Barone, Daniele Petrini, Pier Luigi Surico, Sebastiano Nunziata, Claudia Scarani, F. Offi, Valentina Villani, Marco Coassin, Antonio Di Zazzo

Bibliographic record

VenueEye & Contact Lens Science & Clinical Practice · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCorneal surgery and disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity Hospital Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisual acuityMedicineOphthalmologyComa (optics)Corneal topographyKeratomileusisKeratoconusEctasiaAberrations of the eyeSurgeryCorneaOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Scleral lenses (SLs) represent a key treatment for visual rehabilitation in patients with irregular corneas, such as keratoconus (KC), pellucid marginal degeneration (PMD), and postlaser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) ectasia. This study evaluates the impact of profilometry-guided SLs on visual acuity (VA) and ocular aberrations in these patients. METHODS: Medical records of 23 eyes from 23 patients with KC, PMD, and post-LASIK ectasia were reviewed. All patients were fitted with profilometry-guided SLs. High-contrast visual acuity (HCVA), low-contrast visual acuity (LCVA), and aberrometry parameters (Strehl ratio, higher-order root mean square (HO-RMS), coma, spherical aberration, and trefoil) were analyzed before and during SL wear. RESULTS: HCVA improved significantly from 0.62±0.09 logMAR at baseline to 0.03±0.01 logMAR with SL wear ( P <0.05). LCVA also showed significant improvements ( P <0.05). HO-RMS decreased from 2.70±0.54 D to 1.00±0.20 D ( P <0.05), with notable reductions in coma (1.31±0.21 D to 0.49±0.04 D) and trefoil (1.26±0.29 D to 0.34±0.09 D). CONCLUSIONS: Profilometry-guided SLs significantly improve VA and reduce higher-order aberrations in patients with irregular corneas, offering an effective nonsurgical solution for enhancing vision quality in these complex cases.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.387 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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 venueEye & Contact Lens Science & Clinical PracticeSame topicCorneal surgery and disordersFrench-language works237,207