MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3195898772 · doi:10.1097/pra.0000000000000558

The Vision of Blindness—Sight Versus Insight: A Case Report and Literature Review of Self-enucleation (Oedipism)

2021· review· en· W3195898772 on OpenAlexaff
Polyxeni Vasilopoulou, Orestis Giannakopoulos, Pavlos Beis, Gerasimos Konstantinou

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatric Practice · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnucleationContext (archaeology)BlindnessMedicinePresentation (obstetrics)EtiologyIdentification (biology)PsychosisPsychiatryPsychologySurgeryOptometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Self-enucleation or "Oedipism" is a rare ophthalmic and psychiatric emergency. Given the severity of its consequences, it requires proper medical management and that clinicians understand and be aware of the psychiatric presentation. Important clinical considerations include identification of various etiologies leading to self-enucleation, awareness of possible complications, and provision of appropriate care. We present a case of bilateral self-enucleation by a young male patient in the context of his first episode of psychosis and review the literature on this clinical entity. Ocular damage interferes significantly with activities of daily living and is associated with decreased quality of life so that identifying risk factors is of major importance to prevent this dangerous behavior.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.367 · 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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatric PracticeSame topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207