MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2973761911 · doi:10.1016/j.eurpsy.2019.09.006

Electroretinography in psychiatry: A systematic literature review

2019· review· en· W2973761911 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Youssef, Siddharth Nath, Gary Chaimowitz, Sébastien Prat

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsErgElectroretinographyPsychiatrySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychologyPanic disorderMedicineAnxietyNeuroscienceRetina

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review aims to consolidate the available information on use of electroretinography as a diagnostic tool in psychiatry. The electroretinogram (ERG) has been found to have diagnostic utility in cocaine withdrawal (reduced light-adapted b-wave response), major depressive disorder (reduced contrast gain in pattern ERG), and schizophrenia (reduced a- and b-wave amplitudes). This review examines these findings as well as the applicability of ERG to substance use disorder, Alzheimer's disease, autism spectrum disorder, panic disorder, eating disorders, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and medication use. While there have been promising results, current research suffers from a lack of specificity. Further research that quantifies anomalies in ERG present in psychiatric illness is needed.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0100.010
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations48
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean PsychiatrySame topicRetinal Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207