MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3030595625 · doi:10.1080/09286586.2020.1766513

Out-of-School Vision Screening in North India: Estimating the Magnitude of Need

2020· article· en· W3030595625 on OpenAlexaff
Shalinder Sabherwal, Ishaana Sood, Zeeshan Siddiqui, Shantanu Dasgupta, Suma Ganesh, Ken Basset

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmic Epidemiology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinopathy of Prematurity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRural areaPopulationAbsenteeismGovernment (linguistics)DemographyOptometryPediatricsEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Few studies have examined the extent to which school-based vision screening is sufficient to achieve universal coverage among school-aged children in India.Method: A rural administrative region (‘Block’) was examined. Government records provided the total population of the rural Block, the proportion of school-aged children, and school authorities in the Block provided the number of enrolled students. Absenteeism was measured directly by visiting a representative sample of the schools. The proportion of the school age population found in school was assessed using the indicator, Effective Coverage (EC): the proportion of children attending school divided by the total population of school-aged children in the region.Results: In the rural block, the proportion of children actually enrolled in school was 52% of the school-aged population, with 68% of them attending school. Therefore, EC was 35% (68% of the 52% enrolled).Conclusion: Population coverage by school vision screening would be unacceptably low in a rural setting in northern India. Out-of-school vision screening programs are needed in these rural settings to achieve universal coverage.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.377
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 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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOphthalmic EpidemiologySame topicRetinopathy of Prematurity StudiesFrench-language works237,207