Bibliographic record
Abstract
Letters17 April 2007The Perils of PERRLALeonard A. Levin, MD, PhDLeonard A. Levin, MD, PhDFrom University of Wisconsin Medical School and University of Montréal; Montréal, Québec, Canada.Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-146-8-200704170-00022 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail Background: The pupillary examination is arguably the single most useful clinical test of the nervous system in the conscious or unconscious patient. When properly done with a few swings of a light, the examination can assess the functional status of the retina, optic nerve, contralateral optic tract, cranial nerve III, dorsal midbrain, and sympathetic chain from the hypothalamus down to the lower cervical spinal cord and up to the cavernous sinus and orbit. The results of normal pupil testing are frequently documented with PERRLA (pupils equal, round, reactive to light, and accommodation). But PERRLA is not only incorrect and inexact—it ...Reference1. Levatin P. Pupillary escape in disease of the retina or optic nerve. Arch Ophthalmol. 1959;62:768-79. [PMID: 14416133] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAuthors: Leonard A. Levin, MD, PhDAffiliations: From University of Wisconsin Medical School and University of Montréal; Montréal, Québec, Canada.Disclosures: None disclosed. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Metrics 17 April 2007Volume 146, Issue 8Page: 615-616KeywordsDenervationOptic nerveOptic neuropathyParalysisReflexesRetinaSpinal cordSympathetic nervous systemVisionVisual impairments ePublished: 17 April 2007 Issue Published: 17 April 2007 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2007 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.009 |
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".