MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084348830 · doi:10.1097/opx.0b013e3181787c61

Glaucoma Research Taking Stock

2008· article· en· W2084348830 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anthony J. Adams

Bibliographic record

VenueOptometry and Vision Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlaucomaOptometryCompendiumMedicineOphthalmologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optometry and Vision Science is proud to provide this entire issue dedicated to glaucoma research. The Guest Editors have brought together a wonderful resource for researchers and clinicians alike. With three separate invited perspectives as Clinical Reports and five authoritative Reviews in current research topics in glaucoma by leading colleagues in the field, there is a rich serving indeed. In addition eight original research articles give wonderful original research findings and glimpses of what is ahead in glaucoma research and patient care. This is the second Optometry and Vision Science issue dedicated to Glaucoma research and its impact on direct care of glaucoma patients. The first, guest edited by four Academy fellows and leaders in the Optometric Glaucoma Society (OGS),1 was published in 2006 and now is available open access.2 It had substantial impact. In this June 2008 Feature Issue we have leading researchers in optometry and ophthalmology acting as our Guest Editors; they have put together a superb compendium of work with authorship contributions from around the world, including Canada, UK, US, Australia, Portugal, and Germany. The Feature Issue brings direct clinical patient care relevance and perspective while assessing and reporting the latest advances in glaucoma discovery and understanding. The effort was ably lead by Brad Fortune, OD, PhD, FAAO, a glaucoma researcher at Discoveries in Sight in Portland Oregon. He has been simply superb in all his efforts to make this a first class contribution to the literature. He was well supported by fellow Guest Editors William (“Bill”) Hare, OD, PhD, from Irvine, California, Allison McKendrick, OD, PhD, from Melbourne, Australia, and Robert Weinreb, MD, from San Diego, California. All enjoy fine reputations in the vision and eye research world and all are active in glaucoma research. Their Guest Editorial provides an excellent overview of glaucoma research today and, in particular, the contributions you will find in this issue. I know you will enjoy their ‘product’!FIGURE 1.: From left to right. Guest Editors: Brad Fortune, OD, PhD, FAAO, William A. Hare, OD, PhD, Allison M. McKendrick, MScOptom, PhD, and Robert N. Weinreb, MD.Anthony J. Adams Editor-in-Chief Berkeley, California

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 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)0.001
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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.689

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.430 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptometry and Vision ScienceSame topicGlaucoma and retinal disordersFrench-language works237,207