MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164124560 · doi:10.1109/iembs.1990.691329

Diltiazem-induced Vertical Eye-movement Hypometria Detected By A High-speed Eye Tracking System Optimized For Clinical Investigation

2005· article· en· W2164124560 on OpenAlexaff
Richard C. Frecker, W. James MacLean, Moshe Eizenman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Eye Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEye movementDiltiazemSaccadic maskingExtraocular musclesPopulationFixation (population genetics)Stimulus (psychology)MedicineNeuroscienceAnatomyOphthalmologyInternal medicinePsychologyCalcium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses the optimization of a high-speed (1 kHz) 1st-Purkinje eye-tracking system for use in a clinical research setting. Through the use of stimulus generation and data analysis software, saccadic, pursuit, and fixation eye movements can be easily elicited, recorded, and analyzed in a clinical population. The system was used to investigate the effects of the L-type (slow) calcium channel blocker diltiazem on oculomotor performance in a single subject. Vertical saccades were found to have a significant decrease in accuracy (undershoot) (p < 0.05, one-way ANOVA). Increased variance was observed for gain and phase responses of pursuit movements. No significant changes were observed in central or lo eccentric fixations. L-type calcium channels are found in high numbers (50-100-fold higher than in cardiac membranes) in skeletal muscle t-tubules, including those in extraocular muscle. We have shown the use of diltiazem to be associated, with a previously-unreported vertical eye movement hypometria.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.274
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.310 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOphthalmology and Eye DisordersFrench-language works237,207