MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2924033560 · doi:10.1155/2019/5157628

Inverse Occlusion: A Binocularly Motivated Treatment for Amblyopia

2019· article· en· W2924033560 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeural Plasticity · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMinistry of Human Resources and Social SecurityNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNatural Science Foundation of Zhejiang ProvinceWenzhou Medical UniversityERA-Net NEURON
KeywordsNeuroscienceOcclusionPsychologyMedicineAudiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent laboratory findings suggest that short-term patching of the amblyopic eye (i.e., inverse occlusion) results in a larger and more sustained improvement in the binocular balance compared with normal controls. In this study, we investigate the cumulative effects of the short-term inverse occlusion in adults and old children with amblyopia. This is a prospective cohort study of 18 amblyopes (10-35 years old; 2 with strabismus) who have been subjected to 2 hours/day of inverse occlusion for 2 months. Patients who required refractive correction or whose refractive correction needed updating were given a 2-month period of refractive adaptation. The primary outcome measure was the binocular balance which was measured using a phase combination task; the secondary outcome measures were the best-corrected visual acuity which was measured with a Tumbling E acuity chart and converted to logMAR units and the stereoacuity which was measured with the Random-dot preschool stereogram test. The average binocular gain was 0.11 in terms of the effective contrast ratio ( <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1"> <mml:mi>z</mml:mi> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>−</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:mn>2.344</mml:mn> </mml:math> , <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M2"> <mml:mi>p</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.019</mml:mn> </mml:math> , 2-tailed related samples Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test). The average acuity gain was 0.13 logMAR equivalent ( <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M3"> <mml:mi>t</mml:mi> <mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>17</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:mfenced> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>4.76</mml:mn> </mml:math> , <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M4"> <mml:mi>p</mml:mi> <mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.001</mml:mn> </mml:math> , 2-tailed paired samples <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M5"> <mml:mi>t</mml:mi> </mml:math> -test). The average stereoacuity gain was 339 arc seconds ( <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M6"> <mml:mi>z</mml:mi> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>−</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:mn>2.533</mml:mn> </mml:math> , <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M7"> <mml:mi>p</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.011</mml:mn> </mml:math> ). Based on more recent research concerning adult ocular dominance plasticity, we conclude that inverse occlusion in adults and old children with amblyopia does produce long-term gains to binocular balance and that acuity and stereopsis can improve in some subjects.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.290 · 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