MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2974415739 · doi:10.3121/cmr.2019.1486

Neuropsychiatric Adverse Events from Topical Ophthalmic Timolol

2019· review· en· W2974415739 on OpenAlex
Nevio Cimolai

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Medicine & Research · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDrug-Induced Ocular Toxicity
Canadian institutionsChildren's & Women's Health Centre of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAdverse effectTimololIntensive care medicineDrugAnesthesiaPharmacologyPsychiatryIntraocular pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Timolol is a commonly-used topical antiglaucoma medication and has proven to be highly efficacious for most recipients. Among the reported adverse events, the neuropsychiatric spectrum has been cited, albeit for a small proportion of those treated. This review summarizes the cumulative published experience of such side effects and assesses the quality of evidence. As for other beta-blockers, whether orally or topically administered, various central nervous systems dysfunctions have been detailed in either case reports or larger patient series. The adverse event commonly resolves following drug termination. Rigorous and more definitive studies of causation are lacking, and to some, such paucity has reduced the belief of a cause and effect relationship. Until otherwise proven, deference should be afforded to the potential for topical timolol to cause neuropsychiatric side effects, and at-risk patients should be closely monitored when they are prescribed this pharmacological agent.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.012

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 head0.542
GPT teacher head0.619
Teacher spread0.077 · 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