MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Visual defects in Nepalese children with Down syndrome

2010· article· en· W2020549131 on OpenAlexaff
Nabin Paudel, Susan J. Leat, Prakash Adhikari, J. Margaret Woodhouse, Jyoti Baba Shrestha

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical and Experimental Optometry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDown syndromeRefractive errorOptometryMedicineAudiologyPsychologyOphthalmologyVisual acuityPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Down syndrome (DS) is a common chromosomal anomaly. People with this syndrome have recognisable physical characteristics and limited intellectual abilities. The aim of this study was to determine visual defects, especially refractive error and binocular anomalies, in a sample of Nepalese children with DS. METHODS: Thirty-six children with DS (19 boys and 17 girls) from the Kathmandu valley, aged from four months to 18 years, underwent detailed optometric examination. Cycloplegic refraction was performed on all subjects. Vision on presentation of all the children was assessed with preferential looking cards, the Kay picture cards, the Bailey-Lovie logMAR chart or the Snellen chart. Binocular function was assessed with cover test, Hirschberg or Bruckner test. RESULTS: Cycloplegic refraction of the children revealed that 80 per cent of the children had significant refractive error. Most of them had hyperopia (55 per cent), followed by astigmatism (44 per cent), myopia (25 per cent) and anisometropia (19 per cent). Only two (5.6 per cent) children were strabismic and both of them were alternating esotropes. Nystagmus was present in 10 (28 per cent). Other ocular findings were upward slanting palpebral fissures, blepharitis, congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction, blepharoconjunctivitis, chalazion and lenticular opacities. CONCLUSION: Nepalese children with DS have a high prevalence of refractive error and nystagmus. Regular eye examinations are indicated for these children to enable early diagnosis and appropriate management of ocular disorders to improve their vision and quality of life.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.411 · 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 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

Citations27
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical and Experimental OptometrySame topicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesFrench-language works237,207