MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329921356 · doi:10.1017/s0317167100014979

Spontaneous Blink Rates in Children During Different Types of Eye Movements

2013· article· en· W2329921356 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Michael S. Salman, Liumei Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaChildren's Hospital of WinnipegChildren's Hospital Research Institute of Manitoba
FundersUniversity of Cambridge
KeywordsFixation (population genetics)Horizontal and verticalEye movementPsychologyGazeAudiologyCommunicationMathematicsMedicineGeometryNeurosciencePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The spontaneous blink rate (SBR) is variable in humans. It increases rapidly during childhood before reaching a plateau in adulthood at 10-20 blinks/minute. Our aim was to compare the SBR during different visual tasks in children. METHODS: Thirty-nine healthy participants (mean age(SD):13.6(3.5)years, M=21), made horizontal and vertical visually-guided saccades, tracked a horizontal and vertical target, performed horizontal and vertical active sinusoidal head rotations in light and darkness while looking straight ahead (VOR task) or fixated straight ahead and in four directions of gaze. The eyes of each participant were videotaped and reviewed twice to determine the SBR. Parametric and non-parametric tests were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: The median SBR during fixation straight ahead was seven blinks/minute, which was similar to the SBR during horizontal saccades and horizontal smooth pursuit tasks. The median SBR during vertical smooth pursuit and vertical saccades were significantly lower than during fixation (p≤0.042). The median SBR during the VOR task in light and horizontal VOR in darkness were significantly higher than during fixation (p=0.019-0.024). CONCLUSIONS: The median SBR during visual fixation was lower than that reported previously in 5-14 years-old children during rest or 11-20 years-old subjects during quiet conversation. The median SBR was even lower during vertical smooth pursuit and saccades tasks. This may be due to differences in concentration required for visual fixation in general and vertical visual tasks more specifically. The higher SBR during the VOR may be due to drying of the eyes during head shaking.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicOcular Surface and Contact LensFrench-language works237,207