Disruption and reacquisition of binocular vision in childhood and in adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article reviews the most recent studies that address the loss of and restoration of binocular vision in childhood and adulthood and summarizes recent changes in treatment approaches. RECENT FINDINGS: Studies during the last two years support the idea of continued plasticity of the binocular visual system throughout life. Children and adults with strabismus onset following binocular vision maturation are susceptibility to a permanent disruption of stereopsis and sensory fusion. Plasticity of the binocular visual system, however, also means continued restorability of function. Despite a rather short critical time interval for restoration of normal function (three months in children and 12 months in adults), peripheral or extramacular binocular visual function can be restored in most patients whose onset of disruption follows binocular maturation. SUMMARY: Stereoacuity loss can occur in the visually mature patient who develops strabismus later in life and delay of treatment can be deleterious to the restoration of normal macular binocular vision. However, despite any delay of treatment, most patients with strabismus acquired following binocular vision maturation will manifest some stereoacuity or sensory fusion following eye realignment. These findings suggest all patients with strabismus need to have their eyes aligned, either surgically or optically, to maximize their binocular vision outcome.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".