MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2934765971 · doi:10.1007/s10633-019-09685-8

ISCEV extended protocol for the stimulus–response series for light-adapted full-field ERG

2019· article· en· W2934765971 on OpenAlexaff
Daphne L. McCulloch, Mineo Kondo, Ruth Hamilton, Pierre Lachapelle, André Messias, Anthony G. Robson, Shinji Ueno

Bibliographic record

VenueDocumenta Ophthalmologica · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsErgStimulus (psychology)Computer scienceElectroretinographyOptometryOphthalmologyMedicinePsychologyCognitive psychologyRetinal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision (ISCEV) standard for full-field electroretinography (ERG) describes a minimum protocol for clinical testing but encourages additional ERG testing when appropriate. This ISCEV extended protocol describes methods to record and evaluate a light-adapted (LA) ERG stimulus–response series with increasing flash strengths. The LA ERG stimulus–response series (also referred to as the luminance–response or intensity–response series in the published literature) can characterise generalised cone system function more comprehensively than the ISCEV standard LA ERGs alone. The amplitude of LA ERG a-waves, arising from cones and cone off-bipolar cells, typically shows a saturating function. The LA ERG b-wave amplitudes, which arise primarily from activity of retinal bipolar cells, show an amplitude peak followed by a nonzero plateau (the “photopic hill” phenomenon). This ISCEV extended protocol specifies a stimulus–response series suitable to evaluate generalised dysfunction affecting the LA retina, to aid in distinguishing between the on- and off-responses of the cone system and to monitor ERG changes in these characteristics. The LA ERG stimulus–response series for a- and b-waves is recorded to a sequence of nine flash stimuli ranging from 0.03 to 300 cd s m −2 , superimposed on a standard background of 30 cd m −2 . A shorter protocol is also presented to measure the mid-range of the function (the “photopic hill”) using 5 flash stimuli.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1710.054

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations58
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDocumenta OphthalmologicaSame topicRetinal Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207