MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410235257 · doi:10.57204/001c.136431

Reaching 20/20 with Vision Therapy: Vision Therapy in Managing Moderate Refractive Amblyopia after Patching

2025· article· en· W4410235257 on OpenAlexaff
Jenny JY LeeD

Bibliographic record

VenueCRO (Clinical & Refractive Optometry) Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptometryMedicineOphthalmology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Refractive amblyopia is typically managed with a full correction of the refractive error followed by monocular occlusion in unilateral cases until visual acuity has plateaued. However, there is less emphasis on recovery or improvement of stereopsis as well as other visual functions. Moreover, there often remains some reduction in visual acuity even after a full course of patching. This case explores some of the benefits and clinical and subjective changes observed when vision therapy is implemented as a further course of management after the cessation of patching. The benefits of vision therapy in promoting binocularity, visual acuity, and stereoacuity is discussed.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.004
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.430 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCRO (Clinical & Refractive Optometry) JournalSame topicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesFrench-language works237,207