Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To investigate depth perception in glaucoma suspects compared to glaucoma patients and controls. METHODS: Glaucoma suspects (n = 16), patients (n = 18), and normal age matched controls (n = 19) aged 40-65 years were prospectively evaluated for depth perception deficits using the Frisby test. Stereoacuity was measured by stereothreshold in seconds of arc for each group. RESULTS: Glaucoma suspects showed significantly increased mean stereothreshold compared to age matched normals (144.1 (SE 35.2) v 26.6 (3.7) seconds of arc; p = 0.0004). The mean stereothreshold in glaucoma patients was also increased compared to age matched normals 148.1 (33.8) v 26.6 (3.7) seconds of arc; p = 0.0004). CONCLUSIONS: Glaucoma suspects show depth perception deficits. The impaired stereovision in glaucoma suspects suggests that binocular interactions can be disrupted in the presence of normal visual fields by standard achromatic automated perimetry.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".