Static ocular counterroll reflex in skew deviation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The static ocular counterroll (OCR) reflex generates partially compensatory torsional eye movements during head roll. It is mediated by the utricle in the inner ear. Skew deviation is a vertical strabismus thought to be caused by imbalance in the utriculo-ocular pathway. We hypothesized that if skew deviation is indeed caused by damage to this reflex pathway, patients with skew deviation would show abnormal OCR. METHODS: Eighteen patients with skew deviation caused by brainstem or cerebellar lesions and 18 normal participants viewed a target at 1 m. Ocular responses to static passive head roll-tilts of approximately 20° were recorded using search coils. Static OCR gain was calculated as the change in torsional eye position divided by the change in head position during sustained head roll. Perception of the subjective visual vertical (SVV) was also measured. RESULTS: Group mean OCR gain was reduced by 45% in patients. At an individual level, OCR gains were asymmetric between eyes and between torsional directions in 90% of patients. In addition, the hypotropic eye incyclotorting gain was lower than the hypertropic eye excyclotorting gain during head roll toward the hypotropic eye in 94% of patients. No consistent pattern of gain asymmetry was found during head roll toward the hypertropic eye. The SVV was tilted toward the hypotropic eye. CONCLUSION: Static OCR gain is significantly reduced in skew deviation. Interocular and directional gain asymmetries are also prevalent. The asymmetries provide further evidence that disruption of the utriculo-ocular pathway is a mechanism for skew deviation.
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 | 0.000 | 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".