Mydriatic and Cardiovascular Effects of Phenylephrine 2.5% versus Phenylephrine 10%, Both Associated with Tropicamide 1%
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate and compare cardiovascular effects (blood pressure and heart rate) of phenylephrine 2.5% versus phenylephrine 10%, and compare pupil diameter before and after instillation of eyedrops. METHODS: A total of 58 patients scheduled for funduscopy were dilated with either phenylephrine 2.5% and tropicamide 1% (group 0, n = 29 patients, 58 eyes) or phenylephrine 10% and tropicamide 1% (group 1, n = 29 patients, 58 eyes). Only one drop per eye of each drug was administered. In both groups, pupil diameter, blood pressure and heart rate were measured before and 40 min after eyedrop instillation. RESULTS: We did not observe significant changes in blood pressure or heart rate. Mean pupil diameter in group 0, before the instillation of eyedrops, was 3.51 mm and, in group 1, 2.66 mm. After medication, mean values were 7.38 mm in group 0 and 7.42 mm in group 1. Mean variation was 3.87 mm in group 0 and 4.76 mm in group 1 (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our results corroborate the finding that one single drop of either 2.5 or 10% phenylephrine is safe and, when 1% tropicamide is combined, satisfactory pupil dilation is achieved.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it