MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3155525217 · doi:10.1080/2576117x.2021.1906830

The 20 Prism Diopter Base Out Prism Test in Pseudostrabismus

2021· article· en· W3155525217 on OpenAlexaff
Jocelyn Zurevinsky, Anthony Ojukwu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Binocular Vision and Ocular Motility · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Eye Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatoon City Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrismStrabismusTest (biology)OptometryBase (topology)DioptrePsychologyMedicineOphthalmologyOpticsMathematicsGeologyPhysicsVisual acuity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 20 Base Out Prism Test is one of the artillery of fusion tests used in vision and strabismus screening, and in daily pediatric strabismus practice. Its use has been described in textbooks as early as 1958, but the test has not yet been validated.We present a cohort of esotropic cases formerly diagnosed with pseudostrabismus who were tested with the 20BO test, and explore the possible explanations for their positive response rate of 100%.

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)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Binocular Vision and Ocular MotilitySame topicOphthalmology and Eye DisordersFrench-language works237,207