MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963142811 · doi:10.1111/cxo.12944

Post‐stroke visual midline shift syndrome

2019· review· en· W2963142811 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

VenueClinical and Experimental Optometry · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSpatial Neglect and Hemispheric Dysfunction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersCanadian Optometric Education Trust Fund
KeywordsStroke (engine)MedicineOptometryOphthalmologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyAudiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The state of research on the topic of visual midline shift syndrome following a cerebrovascular accident is unknown. A scoping review was conducted using the search terms of 'visual midline shift' (or equivalent) and 'cerebrovascular accident' (or equivalent). Articles were selected from eight academic and one grey literature database, and went through two levels of review, as per Arksey and O'Malley, before being deemed acceptable for inclusion. Of the 931 abstracts reviewed, 27 articles met the criteria for inclusion. Data extracted from the selected articles included terminology and definition, symptoms, underlying pathophysiology, duration, assessment method, and management of visual midline shift syndrome following cerebrovascular accident. There is agreement on the existence of a midline shift following a cerebrovascular accident resulting in poor posture and imbalance. Much uncertainty exists in the literature regarding terminology, underlying pathophysiology, assessment method and management of this condition. Further research is required.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.368 · 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