MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3029471361 · doi:10.3389/fnsys.2020.00032

Retinal and Optic Nerve Integrity Following Monocular Inactivation for the Treatment of Amblyopia

2020· article· en· W3029471361 on OpenAlexafffund
Nadia R. DiCostanzo, Nathan A. Crowder, Braden A. Kamermans, Kevin R. Duffy

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Systems Neuroscience · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsOptic nerveRetinal ganglion cellRetinalRetinaOphthalmologyMyelinRetinal degenerationMonocular deprivationGlial fibrillary acidic proteinMedicineGanglionNeuroscienceAnatomyBiologyPathologyCentral nervous systemVisual cortexOcular dominance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In animal models, monocular deprivation (MD) by lid closure mimics the effects of unilateral amblyopia in humans. Temporary inactivation of one or both eyes with intraocular administration of tetrodotoxin (TTX) has recently been shown to promote recovery from the anatomical effects of MD at post-critical period ages when standard recovery strategies fail. In the current study, the retinae and optic nerves of animals subjected to 10 days of monocular retinal inactivation were assessed for pathological changes as a means of assessing the viability of this potential new amblyopia therapy. Retinal sections from both eyes were subjected to hematoxylin and eosin staining and were then examined for cell density and soma size in the ganglion cell layer (GCL). Sections of the optic nerve from each eye were examined for neurofilament protein, myelin, glial cell density, and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP). Our study revealed no evidence of gross histopathological abnormalities following inactivation for 10 days, nor was there evidence of degeneration of axons or loss of myelin in the optic nerve serving inactivated eyes. On all measurements, the inactivated eye was indistinguishable from the fellow eye, and both were comparable to normal controls. We confirmed that our inactivation protocol obliterated visually-evoked potentials for 10 consecutive days, but visual responses were restored to normal after the effects of inactivation wore off. Notwithstanding the critical need for further assessment of ocular and retinal health following inactivation, these results provide evidence that retinal inactivation as a treatment for amblyopia does not produce significant retinal damage or degeneration.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Systems NeuroscienceSame topicGlaucoma and retinal disordersFrench-language works237,207