Investigation of the efficacy and safety of retinal inactivation as a treatment for amblyopia in cats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Deprivation of normal vision early in postnatal development elicits modifications of neural circuitry within the primary visual pathway that can cause a severe and intractable vision impairment (amblyopia). In cats, amblyopia is often modeled with monocular deprivation (MD), a procedure that involves temporarily closing the lids of one eye. Following long-term MD, brief inactivation of the dominant eye's retina can promote recovery from the anatomical and physiological effects of MD. In consideration of retinal inactivation as a viable treatment for amblyopia it is imperative to compare its efficacy against conventional therapy, as well as assess the safety of its administration. Methods: In the current study we compared the respective efficacies of retinal inactivation and occlusion of the dominant eye (reverse occlusion) to elicit physiological recovery from a prior long-term MD in cats. Because deprivation of form vision has been associated with development of myopia, we also examined whether ocular axial length or refractive error were altered by a period of retinal inactivation. Results: The results of this study demonstrate that after a period of MD, inactivation of the dominant eye for up to 10 days elicited significant recovery of visually-evoked potentials that was superior to the recovery measured after a comparable duration of reverse occlusion. After monocular retinal inactivation, measurements of ocular axial length and refractive error were not significantly altered from their pre-inactivation values. The rate of body weight gain also was not changed during the period of inactivation, indicating that general well-being was not affected. Discussion: These results provide evidence that inactivation of the dominant eye after a period of amblyogenic rearing promotes better recovery than eye occlusion, and this recovery was achieved without development of form-deprivation myopia.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".