Saccade dynamics in peripheral vs central sixth nerve palsies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate differences between peripheral idiopathic and central sixth nerve palsies from brainstem damage by comparing peak velocities and durations of horizontal saccades. METHODS: Fourteen patients with unilateral incomplete sixth nerve palsies caused by idiopathic, presumed ischemic, peripheral damage, 5 with incomplete central (fascicular) palsy caused by brainstem lesions, and 10 controls were studied. Palsies under 1 month in duration were designated as acute and those of longer duration were chronic. Among peripheral palsies, five were acute, nine were chronic. Among central palsies, two were acute, three were chronic. Subjects made +/- 10 deg horizontal saccades while wearing search coils. Serial recordings were made in seven patients with acute palsy (five peripheral, two central). RESULTS: Centrifugal abducting saccadic velocities in the paretic eye were subnormal in both central and peripheral acute palsies, as anticipated from lateral rectus weakness. In chronic central palsies, abducting velocities in the paretic eye remained reduced. However, in chronic peripheral palsies, velocities became normal in the tested range of excursion, within 2 months of onset, despite persisting abduction deficit. CONCLUSIONS: Saccade peak velocities are reduced and their durations are prolonged in the field of action of acutely palsied peripheral and central nerves. Speeds remain reduced in chronic central (fascicular) palsies, consistent with limited regeneration within the brain. Saccade speeds are repaired in chronic peripheral palsies, probably by remyelination and axonal regeneration, and perhaps also by central monocular adaptation of innervation selectively to the paretic eye, in order to drive both eyes rapidly and simultaneously into the paretic field of motion.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".