Evaluation of pattern-reversal visual evoked potential in patients with neuromyelitis optica
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The visual evoked potential (VEP) is used in the evaluation of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients, showing a delay in P100 wave latency with no changes in amplitude in 60-100% of cases. In the last decade, the recurrent form of neuromyelitis optica (NMO) has been recognized, and clinically characterized by acute events of transverse myelitis (TM) and optic neuritis (ON), differing from MS in clinical and laboratory criteria. Despite these differences, so far, the VEP parameters described in MS have been used in the evaluation of patients with NMO. The objective of this study was to investigate VEP responses in NMO. METHODS: Patients with NMO underwent pattern-reversal visual stimulation. Nineteen patients were selected for the study. RESULTS: Among the 38 eyes examined, 18 (47.4%) had no visual evoked responses and 13 (34.2%) had a reduction of P100 wave amplitude with normal latency. Only two (5.3%) had the pattern described in MS and five (13.2%) were normal. CONCLUSION: Evaluation of VEP in patients with definite NMO revealed a pattern that is different from that of MS in 81.6% of eyes examined, characterized by the absence of responses, or decreased amplitude with normal latency.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".