MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048504589 · doi:10.1097/wno.0000000000001021

Acute Idiopathic Blind Spot Enlargement and Acute Zonal Occult Outer Retinopathy: Potential Mimics of Neuro-Ophthalmic Disease

2020· review· en· W3048504589 on OpenAlex

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

VenueJournal of Neuro-Ophthalmology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Diseases and Behçet’s Syndrome
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlind spotMedicineFundus (uterus)OphthalmologyAtrophyElectroretinographyOccultRetinal DisorderRetinopathyRetinalPathologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1988, William Hoyt, MD, et al described "acute idiopathic blind spot enlargement" (AIBSE) in 7 symptomatic patients who had no apparent abnormalities of the optic disc or surrounding retina. With the use of multifocal electroretinography, they showed that the scotoma was caused by occult retinal dysfunction. In 1992, J. Donald Gass, MD, described "acute zonal occult outer retinopathy" (AZOOR) in 13 patients who had sudden loss of often large zones of visual field without fundus abnormalities. Most patients developed zonal atrophy of retinal pigment epithelium and had no improvement in vision. Gass believed that AZOOR, multiple evanescent white dot syndrome, multifocal choroiditis, and AIBSE were all variants of the same disorder. Despite over 3 decades of numerous reports, the classification of these entities, their pathogenesis, and treatment remain controversial. AIBSE and AZOOR may be mistaken for an acute optic neuropathy, so it behooves the neuro-ophthalmologist to be familiar with these disorders. This review describes the initial recognition of AIBSE and its relationship to AZOOR.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.296 · 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