MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

130335 Nonsurgical consecutive exotropia following childhood esotropia: a multicentered study

2025· article· en· W4414848262 on OpenAlexaff
Coralie Hemptinne, Linda Colpa, Sina Khalili, Stephen P. Kraft, Darron Bacal, Demet Yüksel, Alfred Cossari, Kamiar Mireskandari

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Eye Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCongenital diseaseExotropiaComplicationMEDLINEStereoscopic acuity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nonsurgical consecutive exotropia (NCX) occurs when an esotropia (ET) spontaneously converts to exotropia (XT) without surgical intervention. Although NCX is considered to occur in early-onset accommodative ET with high hyperopia, consensus on causation is lacking. We report the clinical characteristics of NCX and assess the response to conservative management.Retrospective, multicenter, observational case series, including patients aged 6 months and older with an initial diagnosis of ET who converted to XT without surgical intervention. Sensory strabismus was excluded. Age, visual acuity, cycloplegic refraction, glasses prescriptions, deviation, and binocular vision were collected.Forty-nine children were included with a mean age of 3.5 ± 1.6 years and 8.4 ± 3.6 years at the time of ET and NCX, respectively. Mean refractive error was +4.40 ± 2.13 diopters (D) and +4.05 ± 2.74 D at the time of ET and NCX, respectively. Accommodative ET occurred in 60% of cases, and only 35.7% were high hyperopes. All but 1 patient presented with XT at distance. In response to the XT, a mean decrease in hyperopic prescription of 1.55 ± 0.48 D was given (N = 17); only 1 case reverted to ET. Eventually, 43% underwent XT surgery, with similar rates between those who had refractive management and those who did not.NCX occurs in both accommodative and nonaccommodative ET; high hyperopia is present in only one-third of cases. On average, drift to XT occurs within 5 years. Refractive management has a modest result. No predictive risk factors were identified. Our findings challenge hyperopia-linked theories of causation. Nonrefractive explanations, such as the role of the vergence system, deserve further study.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 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 topicOphthalmology and Eye DisordersFrench-language works237,207