MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985441534 · doi:10.1097/opx.0b013e318205a162

A Compact Clinical Instrument for Quantifying Suppression

2010· article· en· W1985441534 on OpenAlexaff
Joanne M. Black, Benjamin Thompson, Goro Maehara, Robert F. Hess

Bibliographic record

VenueOptometry and Vision Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: We describe a compact and convenient clinical apparatus for the measurement of suppression based on a previously reported laboratory-based approach. In addition, we report and validate a novel, rapid psychophysical method for measuring suppression using this apparatus, which makes the technique more applicable to clinical practice. METHODS: By using a Z800 dual pro head-mounted display driven by a MAC laptop, we provide dichoptic stimulation. Global motion stimuli composed of arrays of moving dots are presented to each eye. One set of dots move in a coherent direction (termed signal) whereas another set of dots move in a random direction (termed noise). To quantify performance, we measure the signal/noise ratio corresponding to a direction-discrimination threshold. Suppression is quantified by assessing the extent to which it matters which eye sees the signal and which eye sees the noise. RESULTS: A space-saving, head-mounted display using current video technology offers an ideal solution for clinical practice. In addition, our optimized psychophysical method provided results that were in agreement with those produced using the original technique. We made measures of suppression on a group of nine adult amblyopic participants using this apparatus with both the original and new psychophysical paradigms. All participants had measurable suppression ranging from mild to severe. The two different psychophysical methods gave a strong correlation for the strength of suppression (rho = -0.83, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Combining the new apparatus and new psychophysical method creates a convenient and rapid technique for parametric measurement of interocular suppression. In addition, this apparatus constitutes the ideal platform for suppressors to combine information between their eyes in a similar way to binocularly normal people. This provides a convenient way for clinicians to implement the newly proposed binocular treatment of amblyopia that is based on antisuppression training.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.137
GPT teacher head0.595
Teacher spread0.458 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations87
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptometry and Vision ScienceSame topicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesFrench-language works237,207