Bibliographic record
Abstract
otre article de fond prsente les lignes directrices de pratique clinique tant attendues sur les examens priodiques de la vue chez les enfants de moins de cinq ans. Ce document fond sur des donnes probantes a t prpar par un groupe d'experts reprsentant l'Association canadienne des optomtristes, la Socit canadienne d'ophtalmologie et l'Association canadienne d'ophtalmologie pdiatrique et de strabisme, et il a t approuv par ces trois organismes professionnels. Par le pass, les professions des soins oculovisuels du Canada ont eu de la difficult s'entendre sur des lignes directrices en matire de frquence. C'est pourquoi l'laboration d'une approche commune relative aux examens de la vue chez les enfants canadiens d'ge prscolaire est un vnement important dont nous nous rjouissons. Ainsi, les parents canadiens recevront moins de conseils contradictoires propos des soins de la vue pour leurs enfants, et un plus grand nombre d'enfants devraient entrer l'cole dots d'une vision optimale qui amliorera leur apprentissage.
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 | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.205 | 0.115 |
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".