Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: In this study, life patterns on Korean and Canadian teenagers with myopia are compared and analyzed. Methods: Refraction was performed to 332 students with myopia in middle and high schools in Gyeonggi-Do and 288 students with myopia in middle and high schools in Toronto, Ontario. Based on Korean refraction items, the same items with Canadian refraction items were selected as the results for refraction. Survey items on a life pattern were established by adding necessary items to used items in previous studies and survey was directly conducted to students who visited an optical shop. Results: The average myopic degree was approximately 2.79D in Korean students and 2.89D in Canadian students and the myopic degree of Canadian students was slightly higher, but there was no statistically significant difference(p>0.05). Short distance work and related factors, such as school hours, classes in private educational institute, homework hours and game hours, were longer in Canadian students than Korean students and there was a significant difference in game hours(p=0.009) and homework hours(p=0.001) between Korea and Canada. Reading distance and computer watching distance were shorter in Canadian students than Korean students and there was no significant difference between two groups(p>0.05). TV watching time was longer in Korean students and TV watching distance was shorter. There was a significant difference in TV watching time and distance between Korea and Canada(p0.05). Lifestyle depending on the myopic level of Korean students were statistically significant in academy class and class time(p
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".