MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021704071 · doi:10.2147/opth.s9249

Training regimen involving cyclic induction of pupil constriction during far accommodation improves visual acuity in myopic children

2010· article· en· W2021704071 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hidenori Horie, Kenji Yuda, Hiroshi Uozato, Naoto Hara, Wolfram Tetzlaff, Satoru Hisahara, Hiroko Horie, Satomi Nakajima

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical ophthalmology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccommodationMedicineVisual acuityOptometryOphthalmologyPupilRegimenSurgeryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Myopia in school-age children has become increasingly prevalent in industrialized countries, especially in Asia. A large population of school-age children still suffers from low visual acuity. We have developed a novel, safe and noninvasive training method to activate a pupillary constriction response during far accommodation that results in improved visual acuity. METHODS: Myopic children (n = 95) were treated for 3-minute sessions up to twice a week for 12-106 weeks. We stimulated quick cycles of near/far accommodation by displaying a visual object on a LCD screen and moving the screen in cycles from a near (25 cm) to a far (70 cm) point and back, while keeping the retinal projection size and brightness of the object constant. RESULTS: Mechanistically, we noted pupillary constriction upon far accommodation in trained myopic children, which was not seen in normal subjects or in untrained myopic children. Eighty five percent (52/61) of trained myopic right eyes with two sessions weekly experienced improved visual acuity (VA) by more than 0.1 logMAR units with an average improvement of 0.30 +/- 0.03 standard error of mean (SEM) logMAR units. With maintained training, most eyes' improved VA stayed almost constant, for more than 50 weeks in the case of 12 long trained subjects. CONCLUSIONS: This simple, short and safe accommodation training greatly improves the quality of vision in a large population suffering from refractive abnormalities.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations7
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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