MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402441637 · doi:10.1111/opo.13391

Automated visual acuity estimation by optokinetic nystagmus using a stepped sweep stimulus

2024· article· en· W4402441637 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Turuwhenua, Zaw LinTun, Mohammad Norouzifard, Misty Edmonds, Rebecca Findlay, Joanna Black, Benjamin Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmic and Physiological Optics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersHealth Research Council of New Zealand
KeywordsOptokinetic reflexAudiologyVisual acuityStimulus (psychology)OptometryMonocularEye movementMedicineOphthalmologyDiabetic retinopathyArtificial intelligencePsychologyComputer scienceDiabetes mellitus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose To describe an automatic system for objective measurement of visual acuity (VA) using optokinetic nystagmus (OKN). This pilot study tested the system's sensitivity and specificity for detecting reduced VA in healthy adults by comparing VA‐OKN to VA with an Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart (VA‐ETDRS). Methods Adult participants (age 30 ± 12 years) with either reduced VA ( n = 11, VA‐ETDRS > 0.20 logMAR) or normal VA ( n = 12, VA‐ETDRS ≤ 0.20 logMAR) completed monocular VA‐OKN measurements in each eye. The VA‐OKN stimulus was an array of drifting (5°/s) vanishing discs presented in descending/ascending size order (0.00–1.00 logMAR in 0.10 steps). The stimulus was stepped every 2 s, and 10 sweeps were shown per eye (five ascending and five descending). Eye‐tracking data determined when OKN activity ceased (descending sweep) or began (ascending sweep), which was used to determine VA‐OKN for each sweep. The estimates were averaged across sweeps to produce an automated VA‐OKN. The automated sweeps were then provided in randomised order to a reviewer blinded to the VA‐ETDRS findings who determined a final VA‐OKN for an eye. Results A single randomly selected eye from each observer was used for analysis. The sensitivity and specificity of VA‐OKN using the same 0.20 logMAR threshold as VA‐ETDRS was 100%. Comparisons between the VA‐OKN and VA‐ETDRS measures were made for participants in the reduced VA group. There was no significant difference between VA‐OKN and VA‐ETDRS ( p = 0.55) and the two measures produced comparable values ( r 2 = 0.84, 95% limits of agreement = 0.19 logMAR, intra‐class correlation coefficient = 0.90 [95% CI:0.68–0.97]). Conclusions Visual acuity using optokinetic nystagmus correctly identified a VA deficit in adults and for those with a VA deficit, VA‐OKN was strongly correlated with the gold‐standard clinical measure of VA. OKN is a promising method which has the potential for use in cognitively impaired adults and pre‐verbal children.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOphthalmic and Physiological OpticsSame topicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesFrench-language works237,207