MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413881463 · doi:10.1080/02713683.2025.2550002

Gradient Myopic Defocus Causes Chick Scleral Tissue Reinforcement and Structural Scleral Remodeling

2025· article· en· W4413881463 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Eye Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScleraScleral lensOphthalmologyBiologyAnatomyMedicineCornea

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To determine histological effects of myopia progression control (MPC) lens-induced refractive changes on scleral remodeling in chicks. METHODS: 24 Ross-Ross chicks were raised for 14 days. 6 chicks wore conventional -10D lenses for 7 days, followed by no lenses for 7 days. 6 chicks wore conventional -10D lenses for the full 14 days. 6 chicks wore conventional -10D lenses for 7 days, followed by +10D lenses for 7 days. 6 chicks wore conventional -10D lenses for 7 days, followed by MPC lenses for 7 days. MPC lenses had a central power of -10D and a gradient power rise at pupil edge (+2.75D). Chicks were euthanized after 14 days and eyes were processed for histopathological evaluation. Whole mount H&E-stained tissue sections were analyzed using bright field microscopy. RESULTS: > 0.05). CONCLUSION: It is possible to induce appositional growth in hyaline cartilage in the chick sclera. In our study, this has only been achieved by using MPC lenses to reverse previously induced experimental myopia with conventional minus lenses. Our findings suggest that a gradient decrease in peripheral lens power and the resulting differential defocus could trigger of scleral reinforcement through of cartilage growth stimulation in the chick sclera.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.661

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.358 · 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