Ophthalmic Manifestations Of Coronavirus (COVID-19)
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since December 2019, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a global pandemic caused by the highly transmissible severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) [1] There have been several reports of eye redness and irritation in COVID-19 patients, both anecdotal and published, suggesting that conjunctivitis may be an ocular manifestation of SARS-CoV-2 infection A study conducted during the 2003 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) outbreak detected SARS-CoV in tear samples in SARS patients in Singapore [2] Lack of eye protection was a primary risk factor of SARS-CoV transmission from SARS patients to healthcare workers in Toronto, prompting a concern that respiratory illness could be transmitted through ocular secretions [3][[4] Similar concerns have been raised with SARS-CoV-2, especially among eye care providers and those on the front lines triaging what could be initial symptoms of COVID-19 As conjunctivitis is a common eye condition, ophthalmologists may be the first medical professionals to evaluate a patient with COVID-19 Indeed, one of the first providers to voice concerns regarding the spread of Coronavirus in Chinese patients was Li Wenliang, MD, an ophthalmologist He later died from COVID-19 and was believed to have contracted the virus from an asymptomatic glaucoma patient in his clinic The authors of this article have attempted to collect the most up-to-date information on ophthalmic manifestations of COVID-19 as a resource for identifying symptoms, providing diagnostic pearls, and mitigating transmission
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it