Investigating the impact of COVID-19 on individuals with visual impairment
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
We present a comprehensive review of the various challenges that individuals with visual impairment (VI) face during the COVID-19 pandemic. A structured review was done using online databases PubMed, EMBASE, and grey literature databases between 19 April 2021 and 4 August 2021, using search terms ‘COVID-19’, ‘SARS-CoV-2’, ‘Coronavirus’, or ‘pandemic’ combined with ‘visually impaired’, ‘visual impairment’, or ‘Blind’. Studies included were written in English, published after the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of the COVID-19 Pandemic (11 March 2020), and focused on the VI population during the pandemic. The initial search yielded 702 publications, of which 20 met our inclusion criteria and were included in analysis. Emotional distress from deteriorating mental health and social isolation were considerably higher in the VI population. For a community that relies on spatial awareness and touch, regulations related to social distancing and avoiding contact were considerable barriers. Further challenges were noted in accessing healthcare, care, receiving timely health information and changes in regulations, adequately sanitizing, using technology, and completing activities of daily living. In the unprecedented times of the COVID-19 pandemic, the VI community has faced unique challenges. A more holistic and inclusive approach needs to be adopted to ensure that more vulnerable populations are adequately cared for.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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