MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388124004 · doi:10.15353/cjo.v84i2.4972

Cas de cécité au sens de la loi attribuable aux drusen du nerf optique

2022· article· fr· W4388124004 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Loren Bennett

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian journal of optometry/CJO. Canadian journal of optometry · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Eye Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les drusen du nerf optique sont des anomalies du disque du nerf optique relativement peu fréquentes qui sont habituellement découvertes de manière fortuite au cours d’un examen de la vue de routine. Bien que les drusen soient généralement considérés comme bénins, la perte de champ visuel qu’ils occasionnent n’est pas rare. Le déficit de champ visuel est plus fréquent en présence de drusen superficiels plutôt qu’enfouis. Ils se manifestent sous la forme d’anomalies du faisceau des fibres nerveuses, d’une constriction concentrique généralisée ou d’un élargissement de la tache aveugle. L’étendue des dommages varie mais le degré de perte de champ visuel entraîne rarement un déficit fonctionnel marqué. Ce rapport de cas porte sur un patient dont on a présumé que la perte bilatérale concentrique du champ visuel était occasionnée par la présence de drusen du nerf optique ayant occasionné une déficience visuelle grave et une incapacité.

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)0.004
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: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.317 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian journal of optometry/CJO. Canadian journal of optometrySame topicOphthalmology and Eye DisordersFrench-language works237,207