Annual Meeting of the North American Neuro-Ophthalmology Society, Puerto Rico, March 1–6, 2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The North American Neuro-ophthalmology Society (NANOS) held its 40th annual meeting at the Wyndham Rio Mar Beach Resort, Rio Grande, PR. Besides unrelenting sunshine and ocean surf, we had scintillating discussions about cutting edge research and relevant clinical challenges. This year, we had a special symposium which began on Saturday March 1. “When Neurosurgery and Neuro-Ophthalmology Collide” organized by Karl Golnik and Neil Miller. The 4 sessions covered issues of comanagement, baseline testing before surgery, complications, and what the neuro-ophthalmologist can do to prevent or assist in neurosurgical adventures. The Frank Walsh Session was chaired by Prem Subramanian from Johns Hopkins University. The Hopkins team included Ari Blitz, neuroradiologist, and Charles Eberhart, neuopathologist. The expert panel of Sophia Chung, Deborah Friedman, and Steven Newman provided commentary. At the end of the morning and afternoon sessions, key points were reviewed. The best Walsh paper was for “Muscle Bound or Unbound,” by Dane Breker et al (Ann Arbor, MI). Meeting symposia included: 1) “Journal Club” featuring updates on transient ischemic attacks and stroke prevention, myasthenia gravis, traumatic brain injury, and treatment of nystagmus. 2) “Hot Topics: Zebra taming”: paraneoplastic syndromes, toxic and nutritional optic neuropathies, hereditary optic neuropathies, and IgG 4 disease. The Neuro-Ophthalmology Research Disease Investigator Consortium (NORDIC) group covered the initial baseline findings of the Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension Treatment Trial. Lively discussions about “Eye Pain in the Quiet Eye” and “Non-organic Neuro-ophthalmology” kept NANOS members in their seats until the meeting closed. We had outstanding optional symposia including: “Visual Electrophysiology in Neuro-ophthalmology” by Greg Van Stavern, “Hands-on Ophthalmic and Neurologic Examination Techniques for Neuro-Ophthalmologists,” by Mitchell Strominger, “Observational Clinical Research Studies,” lead by Deborah Friedman and Beau Bruce, and “Smartphones and Gadgets” by Joyce Liao. The scientific platform and poster sessions were well attended. There were 245 poster presentations, a record for a NANOS meeting. The newly named James Sharpe Best Abstract Award went to Krista Kinard (University of Utah) for “Chronic migraine is associated with reduced corneal nerve fiber density and length.” The resident awardee was Ajay E. Kariyan, (University of Miami) for “Orbital fibroblasts from thyroid eye disease patients differ in proliferative and adipogenic responses depending on disease sub-type.” The medical student awardee, Matthew Miller (University of Utah) presented “A comparison of clinical features of pseudotumor cerebri secondary to tetracyclines and idiopathic intracranial hypertension.” The 2014 Thomas and Susan Carlow Young Investigator Award was presented to Patrick Yu-Wai-Man (Newcastle, United Kingdom) for his research on Hereditary Optic Neuropathies and for his presentation: “The molecular and Neuro-ophthalmological features of autosomal recessive spastic ataxia of Charlevoix-Saguenay.” Beau Bruce (Emory University) received the NANOS Pilot Grant Award for “Non-mydriatic ocular fundus photography for the acute risk stratification of patients with transient ischemic attack and minor stroke.” Linus Da-Shih Sun (New York, NY) won the NANOS-Fight for Sight joint award for “Quantitative eye movements to evaluate corollary discharge.” The 2014 Jacobson Lecture delivered by Len Levin (Montreal, Quebec) was a tour de force multimedia mystery story—“Seeking Sense in Cecocentral Scotomas: three questions and four answers.” The 2014 Tom Carlow Distinguished Service Award, NANOS's highest honor, was bestowed on Anthony (Tony) Arnold from University of California, Los Angeles (Fig. 1).FIG. 1: Anthony Arnold, MD receives the Distinguished Service Award from North American Neuro-Ophthalmology Society.There was a record of 564 registrants for the NANOS meeting representing 34 countries (excluding the United States). There were spectacular social events as well. Tours of Old San Juan, the El Yunque rainforest, and a bioluminescent mangrove channels kayak event were really interesting and well attended. Janel Fick and her outstanding staff hosted the very well-organized meeting. See you in San Diego, California in 2015!
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".