MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979196518 · doi:10.1167/8.17.48

Diurnal rhythms of refractive error components in normal chick

2010· article· en· W1979196518 on OpenAlexaff
Meghan C. Campbell, Kaitlin Bunghardt, M. L. Kisilak, Elizabeth L. Irving

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiurnal temperature variationRefractive errorCircadian rhythmDiurnal cycleUltradian rhythmOphthalmologyIntraocular pressureBiologyRetinoscopyOpticsMedicineEye diseaseEndocrinologyGeologyPhysicsAtmospheric sciences

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Diurnal variations have been measured in intraocular pressure (IOP), axial length, and anterior biometrics in human. Human diurnal fluctuations in corneal topography and optical aberrations may be associated with eyelid pressure. In chick and marmoset, diurnal rhythms in IOP, axial length and choroidal thickness have been demonstrated. Furthermore, in chicks, normal ocular growth requires a diurnal light cycle. We wished to determine whether normal chicks show diurnal rhythms in refractive error. Methods: Nine chicks were allowed to develop naturally with a 14 h light/10 h dark cycle. Hartmann Shack measurements were taken on both eyes on day 7 at 08:30, 12:30, 16:30, 20:30 and on day 8 at 00:30, 04:30, 08:30 and 16:30. Axial length measurements were taken using A-scan ultrasound. Results: Nine eyes showed significant diurnal variation in axial length. In eight eyes, axial length variation had periods close to 12 hours while one eye had a much longer period. Astigmatic components showed a diurnal rhythm, with a period not significantly different from 24 hours; in 8 eyes of the 18 measured, for each of JCC45 and JCC0. For left eyes, average spherical refraction showed a significant diurnal variation with an 11 hour period, while 3 individual eyes with significant diurnal variations showed either 14 or 24 hour periods. Conclusions: We confirmed the diurnal variation in axial length in chick previously found by others. However, in our case, an ultradian (12 hour) rhythm dominated. In chick, spherical refractive error and astigmatism appear to follow differing diurnal rhythms.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.695
Threshold uncertainty score0.319

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.291 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicGlaucoma and retinal disordersFrench-language works237,207