MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2755106885 · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(17)30278-8

Retinal layer segmentation in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2017· review· en· W2755106885 on OpenAlexaff
Axel Petzold, Laura J. Balcer, Peter A. Calabresi, Fiona Costello, Teresa C. Frohman, Elliot M. Frohman, Elena H. Martínez‐Lapiscina, Ari Green, Randy H. Kardon, Olivier Outteryck, Friedemann Paul, Sven Schippling, P. Vermersch, Pablo Villoslada, Lisanne J. Balk, Orhan Aktaş, Philipp Albrecht, Jane Ashworth, Nasrin Asgari, Graeme C. Black, Daniel Boehringer, Raed Behbehani, Leslie Benson, Robert Bermel, Jacqueline Bernard, Alexander U. Brandt, Jodie Burton, Jonathan Calkwood, Christian Cordano, Ardith Courtney, Andrés Cruz-Herranz, Ricarda Diem, Avril Daly, Hélène Dollfus, Christina Fasser, Carsten Finke, Jette Lautrup Frederiksen, Elena García‐Martín, Inés González‐Suarez, Gorm Pihl-Jensen, Jennifer Graves, Joachim Havla, Bernhard Hemmer, Su‐Chun Huang, Jaime Imitola, Hong Jiang, David Keegan, Eric Kildebeck, Alexander Klistorner, Benjamin Knier, Scott Kolbe, Thomas Korn, Bart P. Leroy, Letizia Leocani, Dorothée Leroux, Petra Lišková, Birgit Lorenz, Jana Lízrová Preiningerová, Janine Mikolajczak, Xavier Montalbán, Mark J. Morrow, Rachel Nolan, Timm Oberwahrenbrock, Frederike Cosima Oertel, Celia Oreja‐Guevara, Benjamin Osborne, Athina Papadopoulou, Marius Ringelstein, Shiv Saidha, Bernardo Sánchez‐Dalmau, Jaume Sastre‐Garriga, Robert K. Shin, Neil Shuey, Kerstin Soelberg, Ahmed Toosy, R. Martinez Torres, Ángela Vidal‐Jordana, Amy Waldman, Owen White, Ann Ming Yeh, Sui H. Wong, Hanna Zimmermann

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Neurology · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptic neuritisMultiple sclerosisRetinalMedicineNerve fiber layerOphthalmologyMeta-analysisOptical coherence tomographyAtrophyOptic nervePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.029
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.568
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.109 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations568
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet NeurologySame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207