MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2781598572 · doi:10.14740/jnr.v7i6.463

Optic Neuritis Presenting With Altitudinal Visual Field Defect in a Neuromyelitis Optica Patient

2017· article· en· W2781598572 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Halil Önder, Farid Khasiyev, Rana Karabudak

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurology Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptic neuritisMedicineNeuromyelitis opticaVisual fieldPresentation (obstetrics)NeuritisOphthalmologyDifferential diagnosisDermatologyMultiple sclerosisPathologySurgeryImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Herein, we report a case with neuromyelitis optica (NMO) who presented with optic neuritis and visual field examination revealed superior altitudinal visual field defect. Via the presentation of this patient, we point out NMO as an alternative differential diagnosis in patients with altitudinal visual defect clinics. Based on this presentation and literature data, we discuss some hypotheses about pathogenesis of optic neuritis in NMO and underlying mechanisms of optic neuritis development presenting with altitudinal visual defect as well. J Neurol Res. 2017;7(6):112-114 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jnr463w

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurology ResearchSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207