The spatial and neural deficit of human amblyopia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Purpose Human functional imaging studies confirm deficits of V1 identified from animal models and suggest additional extrastriatal areas of dysfunction. This study aims to investigate spatial visual and neural deficits in human amblyopia. Methods Participants were 6 adults (mean age=20±2 years) with amblyopia; anisometropia (n=2); mixed (n=4) and 3 normal adults (mean age=31±4 years). Cortical activation for each eye was measured using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and psychophysical methods. Stimuli included four attributes of spatial vision known to be deficient in individuals with amblyopia: visual resolution, contrast sensitivity, vernier acuity and global motion. In each subject, retinotopic mapping experiments were also performed to establish locations of different visual areas and to act as regions of interest. All paradigms used a block design: 18 seconds stimulus ‘on’ alternated with 18s ‘control’, stimulus subtending 15x15 degrees and flickering at a temporal frequency of 8 Hz. The scans were performed on a Siemens Trio 3.0 Tesla System at Royal Holloway University. Results All participants with amblyopia had residual amblyopia following treatment. Mean logMAR visual acuity was 0.24 (sd 0.06) and ‐0.08 (sd 0.06) for amblyopic and fellow eyes respectively. Mean visual acuity for the normals was ‐0.06 (sd 0.06). Global motion was reduced significantly in the amblyopic (p=0.04) and fellow eyes (p=0.05) of observers compared to the normals; amblyopic eye: 54%(25%); fellow eye: 41%(16%); normals: 25%(7%). Conclusion Amblyopic observers show significant deficits of global motion for amblyopic and fellow eye stimulation. This is suggestive of extrastriatal deficits of amblyopia in addition to those in V1.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".