Canonical Grading Scales of Corneal and Conjunctival Staining Based on Psychophysical and Physical Attributes
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: In this study, we apply psychophysical scaling principles based on physical (photometric) attributes of images to better understand the factors involved in clinician judgement of ocular surface staining and, using that knowledge, to develop photographic scales for the assessment of staining for dry eye (DE) and related conditions. Methods: Subjects with noninfectious ocular surface staining were enrolled at five clinical sites. Following instillation of fluorescein, photographs of corneal staining were taken every 30 seconds for at least 5 minutes. The same procedure was followed for conjunctival staining after instillation of 2 µl of 1% lissamine green. A subset of the best corneal and bulbar conjunctival staining images were anonymized and a spectroradiometer measured photometric attributes (luminance and chromaticity). The images were scaled psychophysically by study investigators, who participated in constructing grading scales based on physical and psychophysical analyses. The final grading scales were refined following consultation with outside DE experts. Results: Photographs were collected from 142 subjects (81% women), with an average age of 58 ± 17 years; 89% were diagnosed with DE. There was a monotonic relationship between between physical measurements and psychophysically scaled staining of both corneal (fluorescein) and bulbar (lissamine green) staining. Michelson contrast and u' (chromaticity) accounted for 66% and 64% of the variability in the psychophysically scaled images of fluorescein corneal and lissamine green conjunctival staining, respectively. Translational Relevance: This paper provides examples of the first ever clinically usable ocular surface staining scales validated using psychophysical scaling and the physical attributes (luminance and chromaticity) of the staining itself. In addition, it provides a generalizable method for the development of other clinical scales of ocular appearance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it