MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613518699 · doi:10.1167/iovs.17-21845

Sensitivity to Binocular Disparity is Reduced by Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

2017· article· en· W2613518699 on OpenAlexaff
Gunnar Schmidtmann, Tatiana Ruíz, Alexandre Reynaud, Daniel P. Spiegel, Maude Laguë-Beauvais, Robert F. Hess, Reza Farivar

Bibliographic record

VenueInvestigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraumatic brain injuryBinocular visionAudiologyPsychologyStrabismusMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationNeuroscienceOphthalmologyArtificial intelligencePsychiatryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: The impairment of visual functions is one of the most common complaints following mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Traumatic brain injury-associated visual deficits include blurred vision, reading problems, and eye strain. In addition, previous studies have found evidence that TBI can diminish early cortical visual processing, particularly for second-order stimuli. We investigated whether cortical processing of binocular disparity is also affected by mTBI. Methods: In order to investigate the influence of mTBI on global stereopsis, we measured the quick Disparity Sensitivity Function (qDSF) in 22 patients with mTBI. Patients with manifest strabismus and double vision were excluded. Compared with standard clinical tests, the qDSF is unique in that it offers a quick and accurate estimate of thresholds across the whole spatial frequency range. Results: Results show that disparity sensitivity in the mTBI patients were significantly reduced compared with the normative dataset (n = 61). The peak spatial frequency was not affected. Conclusions: Our results suggest that the reduced disparity sensitivity in patients with mTBI is more likely caused by cortical changes (e.g., axonal shearing, or reduced interhemispheric communication) rather than oculomotor dysfunction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.435
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.011
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.294 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInvestigative Ophthalmology & Visual ScienceSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207