MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2737790309 · doi:10.1097/opx.0000000000001107

Aberrometry Repeatability and Agreement with Autorefraction

2017· article· en· W2737790309 on OpenAlex
Mylan T. Nguyen, David A. Berntsen

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOptometry and Vision Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
FundersNational Eye Institute
KeywordsAutorefractorRepeatabilityZernike polynomialsDioptreSpherical aberrationMathematicsRefractive errorLimits of agreementPupilRoot mean squareOpticsPhysicsOptometryMedicineStatisticsNuclear medicineVisual acuityLens (geology)Wavefront

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SIGNIFICANCE: Commercially available aberrometers are essential to clinical studies evaluating refractive error and image quality. The Discovery System (Innovative Visual Systems, Elmhurst, IL) is a promising clinical instrument that allows investigators to export aberration data for research and analysis purposes. An assessment of the Discovery System's performance is essential to the interpretation of the data obtained. PURPOSE: The aims of this study were to determine the between-visit repeatability of refractive error and higher-order aberration measurements with the Discovery System and to examine between-instrument agreement of refractive error measurements with the Discovery System and Grand Seiko WAM-5500 open-field autorefractor (Grand Seiko Co., Hiroshima, Japan). METHODS: Cycloplegic refractive error values from the Discovery System (over a 3-mm pupil) and the Grand Seiko autorefractor were converted to power vectors (M, J0, and J45), and averaged. Zernike coefficients were also calculated by the Discovery System over a 6-mm pupil through the sixth radial order. Between-visit repeatability and agreement were evaluated using Bland-Altman difference-versus-mean plots. A t-test compared each mean difference (bias) to zero, and the 95% limits of agreement were calculated. RESULTS: Twenty-five young adults with a mean (±SD) cycloplegic spherical-equivalent refractive error of -2.91 ± 1.85 diopters (D) (range, -6.96 to +0.74 D) were enrolled. There were no significant between-visit differences with the Discovery System for M, J0, J45, third- through sixth-order root mean square (RMS), higher-order RMS, or spherical aberration (all P > .30), and the repeatability for defocus and higher-order RMS were ±0.31 D and ±0.095 μm, respectively, for a 6-mm pupil. At a 3-mm pupil, the Discovery System, on average, measured slightly more positive values than the Grand Seiko for M (0.28 D), J0 (0.11 D), and J45 (0.12 D; all P < .005). CONCLUSIONS: The Discovery System was very repeatable and would be an appropriate instrument to measure cycloplegic refractive error and higher-order aberration changes in adults. Small differences in refractive error were found between the Discovery System and Grand Seiko.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.463 · 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