MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794116915 · doi:10.21037/aes.2018.ab106

AB106. ORVIS: a directory of tools for vision rehabilitation

2018· article· en· W2794116915 on OpenAlexaff
Walter Wittich

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Eye Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSpatial Neglect and Hemispheric Dysfunction
Canadian institutionsCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalCentre intégré de santé et de services sociaux de la Montérégie-CentreCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-JeanCentre intégré de santé et de services sociaux de Chaudière-AppalachesCentre Intégré de Santé et de Services Sociaux des LaurentidesUniversité de MontréalSanté MontérégieMAB-Mackay Rehabilitation Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDirectoryLow visionPsychologyPsychological interventionVisual impairmentRehabilitationPerceptionComputer scienceMedicinePsychiatryOptometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The ORVIS infrastructure aims to facilitate the development and availability of valid and adapted tools that will allow functional, perceptual, cognitive and psychological evaluation of low vision clients by researchers and clinicians who work in low vision and visual impairment rehabilitation. Methods: The tools developed or documented within ORVIS Infrastructure are tests or questionnaires which allow, or will allow to assess—in an accurate and reliable manner—characteristics related to visual impairment. The tools in development are: (I) questionnaire de repérage des hallucinations visuelles liées au syndrome de Charles-Bonnet (QR-SCB); (II) repérage des personnes âgées présentant des INDices de déficience VISUELle (IndiVisuel); (III) mesure de l’impact de la déficience visuelle dans les activités quotidiennes (MIDVAQ) and (IV) M’EYE read test. The directory documents 14 tools and offers—within a descriptive sheet—characteristics, components and metrological properties as supported by cited scientific studies. Results: The ORVIS Infrastructure, which aims at the development and availability of assessment tools, fills researchers’ and clinicians’ needs for measurement tools that are valid, effective and appropriate for use with a visually impaired clientele. Such tools are, especially in French, little known and hard to find, and represent a precious resource for those who want to evaluate the efficacy of treatments or interventions. Conclusions: ORVIS is available at www.orvis.vision. Between November 2015 and September 2017, the directory has been accessed 1,383 times by 952 unique visitors.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3510.342

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.311 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Eye ScienceSame topicSpatial Neglect and Hemispheric DysfunctionFrench-language works237,207