MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323678719 · doi:10.1097/wno.0000000000000161

Optical Coherence Tomography Technologies

2014· review· en· W2323678719 on OpenAlexaff
Fiona Costello

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuro-Ophthalmology · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptical coherence tomographyNerve fiber layerOptic nerveNeuroscienceGanglion cell layerRetinalGanglionRetinaAfferentCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)MedicineAnatomyOphthalmologyOptometryPsychologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optical coherence tomography (OCT) has evolved over the past decade to become one of the most important ancillary tests in ophthalmic practice. This noninvasive ocular imaging technique provides high-resolution, cross-sectional images of the retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL), macular region, ganglion cell layer, and optic nerve head. With OCT, we can learn much about axonal-neuronal integrity in the anterior aspect of the afferent visual pathway and gain insights about mechanisms of brain injury in various central nervous system disorders.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.009

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations13
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuro-OphthalmologySame topicGlaucoma and retinal disordersFrench-language works237,207