MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402905833 · doi:10.1167/jov.24.10.1483

Coarse Stereopsis and Eye Alignment in Strabismus

2024· article· en· W4402905833 on OpenAlexaff
Akosua Kesewah Asare, Kimberly Meier, Christopher J. Lyons, Conor Mulholland, Laurie M. Wilcox, Deborah Giaschi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Eye Disorders
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStrabismusStereopsisOptometryComputer scienceOphthalmologyArtificial intelligenceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depth order judgements are supported by both fused (fine) and diplopic (coarse) binocular disparities. There is evidence that they are subserved by distinct mechanisms, for instance, coarse stereopsis matures earlier than fine and is spared in some types of amblyopia whereas fine stereopsis is disrupted. We hypothesize that coarse stereopsis may be used during development to achieve binocular fusion, align the eyes, and promote fine stereopsis. Here we assess this possibility in children receiving eye alignment surgery for strabismus. We tested 14 children pre-surgery, then 3 and 12 months post-surgery. Stereoscopic stimuli were viewed through liquid crystal shutter glasses. Depth-order discrimination was measured for greyscale cartoon characters, relative to a zero-disparity reference frame. We tested 5 disparities characterized as fine (0.17, 0.67 degrees) or coarse (2.0, 2.5, 3.0 degrees) based on previous work. Aged-matched norms from a previous study with the same stimuli and test paradigm were used to identify atypical performance (>2 SD) in strabismic children. Fusion and interocular suppression were measured using the Worth-4-Dot test and a dichoptic eye chart, respectively. Eye alignment (prism dioptres) was measured with a prism cover test. We found that better eye alignment post-surgery was associated with higher coarse disparity accuracy (r= -0.7, p= .02), but not fine (r= 0.2, p= .6), pre-surgery. Pre-surgery performance was atypical for fine disparities for all participants, but typical for coarse disparities for 86% of participants. Fine stereopsis remained atypical for all except 1 participant at 3 months post-surgery, but improved beyond test-retest variability in 73% of participants (all except 1 with typical coarse stereopsis) by 12 months post-surgery. Five participants (all exotropia) achieved typical fine stereopsis, and three of these exhibited typical sensory fusion and interocular suppression. Our results support the hypothesis that coarse stereopsis facilitates eye alignment and the subsequent development of high-resolution stereoscopic mechanisms.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.528
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicOphthalmology and Eye DisordersFrench-language works237,207