Reduction of collinear inhibition in observers with central vision loss using anodal transcranial direct current stimulation: A case series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract People with central vision loss (CVL) due to macular degeneration are forced to rely on their residual peripheral vision and often develop a preferred retinal locus (PRL), a region of intact peripheral retina that is used for fixation. At the PRL, visual processing is impaired due to crowding (cluttering of visual objects). The problem of crowding still persists when images are magnified to account for the lower resolution of peripheral vision. We assessed whether anodal transcranial direct stimulation (a-tDCS), a neuro-modulation technique that alters cortical inhibition, would reduce collinear inhibition (an early component of crowding) when applied to the visual cortex in patients with CVL. Our results showed that applying a-tDCS to the visual cortex for 20mins reduced crowding in three patients with CVL and that the effect was sustained for up to 30mins. Sham stimulation delivered in a separate session had no effect. These initial observations mandate further research into the use of a-tDCS to enhance cortical processing of residual retinal input in patients with CVL.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".