MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058161650 · doi:10.1097/opx.0000000000000442

Eye Examination Testability in Children with Autism and in Typical Peers

2014· article· en· W2058161650 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOptometry and Vision Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsEagle Ridge Hospital
FundersNova Southeastern University
KeywordsEye examinationRefractive errorMedicinePsychologyVisual acuityAudiologyPediatricsOphthalmology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To compare testability of vision and eye tests in an examination protocol of 9- to 17-year-old patients with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) to typically developing (TD) peers. METHODS: In a prospective pilot study, 61 children and adolescents (34 with ASD and 27 who were TD) aged 9 to 17 years completed an eye examination protocol including tests of visual acuity, refraction, convergence (eye teaming), stereoacuity (depth perception), ocular motility, and ocular health. Patients who required new refractive correction were retested after wearing their updated spectacle prescription for 1 month. The specialized protocol incorporated visual, sensory, and communication supports. A psychologist determined group status/eligibility using DSM-IV-TR (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision) criteria by review of previous evaluations and parent responses on the Social Communication Questionnaire. Before the examination, parents provided information regarding patients' sex, race, ethnicity, and, for ASD patients, verbal communication level (nonverbal, uses short words, verbal). Parents indicated whether the patient wore a refractive correction, whether the patient had ever had an eye examination, and the age at the last examination. Chi-square tests compared testability results for TD and ASD groups. RESULTS: Typically developing and ASD groups did not differ by age (p = 0.54), sex (p = 0.53), or ethnicity (p = 0.22). Testability was high on most tests (TD, 100%; ASD, 88 to 100%), except for intraocular pressure (IOP), which was reduced for both the ASD (71%) and the TD (89%) patients. Among ASD patients, IOP testability varied greatly with verbal communication level (p < 0.001). Although IOP measurements were completed on all verbal patients, only 37.5% of nonverbal and 44.4% of ASD patients who used short words were successful. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ASD can complete most vision and eye tests within an examination protocol. Testability of IOPs is reduced, particularly for nonverbal patients and patients who use short words to communicate.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.245

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.412 · 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