MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313454653 · doi:10.4103/ijo.ijo_1569_22

Artificial intelligence and machine learning in ophthalmology: A review

2022· review· en· W4313454653 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIndian Journal of Ophthalmology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubspecialtyMedicineSpecialtyArtificial intelligenceOphthalmologyOptometryNeuro-ophthalmologyData scienceGlaucomaComputer sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the introduction of artificial intelligence (AI) in 1956 by John McCarthy, the field has propelled medicine, optimized efficiency, and led to technological breakthroughs in clinical care. As an important frontier in healthcare, AI has implications on every subspecialty within medicine. This review highlights the applications of AI in ophthalmology: a specialty that lends itself well to the integration of computer algorithms due to the high volume of digital imaging, data, and objective metrics such as central retinal thickness. The focus of this review is the use of AI in retina, cornea, anterior segment, and pediatrics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.259 · 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