Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To analyze the contents of international publications in neuro-ophthalmology during the past decade. METHODS: Medline was searched with the Internet provider PubMed in December 2003, using "eye disease" as the medical subject heading and "optic nerve", "visual pathway", "visual cortex", "ocular motility", and "pupil" as subhead terms for retrieving English-language neuro-ophthalmic articles that were published between 1993 and 2002. RESULTS: A total of 9,585 English-written original articles available for analysis were concerned with a wide range of basic and clinical neuro-ophthalmic subjects, the order of frequency being ocular motility (22.8%), optic nerve (17.2%), visual functions (17.2%), visual cortex (10.1%), retina (8.6%), ocular adnexa (5.9%), optic chiasm (5.8%), brainstem (3.1%), and pupil (3.0%). The major optic nerve disorders included demyelinated optic neuritis, Leber hereditary optic neuropathy, and ischemic optic neuropathy. The major ocular motility disorders were supranuclear palsy, progressive external ophthalmoplegia, and ocular motor nerve disease. The articles were contributed from 73 countries. The top 10 countries ranked by share were USA (40.4%), United Kingdom (10.2%), Japan (8.7 %), Germany (6.0%), Italy (4.0%), Canada (3.5%), France (3.5%), Australia (2.2%), Israel (1.8%), and Turkey (1.8%). Researchers with diverse specialties contributed to the neuro-ophthalmic publications, including ophthalmology (40.5%), neurology/neuroscience (21.7%), and neurosurgery (5.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Neuro-ophthalmic papers were interdisciplinary, contributed by researchers with diverse specialties, and published in a wide range of biomedical as well as neurological journals.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | high |
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 | 0.012 | 0.085 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.161 | 0.241 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".