Everyday Consequences of Childhood Intermittent Exotropia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose To assess the impact of intermittent exotropia (IXT) on eye-related quality of life (ERQOL), reading speed, motor skills, and self-perception in children.Patients and Methods Fifty-one children with basic or pseudo divergence excess IXT (4–13y) were assessed with the triple office control score, a graded clinical measure of exotropia control. Children with IXT also completed at least one of four behavioral evaluations, including ERQOL (PedEyeQ), reading speed (Readalyzer), motor skills (Movement Assessment Battery for Children-2), and self-perception (Self-perception Profile for Children), along with visual acuity and stereoacuity. Results were compared to those of age-matched controls (n = 353) and associations with IXT control score were analyzed.Results Children with IXT and their parent had significantly lower ERQOL scores in all domains compared to controls (Ps < .001). Reading speed was comparable to controls (p = .66). However, children with IXT showed poorer Manual Dexterity (Ps < .001) and Aiming and Catching motor skills (p = .009) in older children. Older children reported lower self-perception in Scholastic competence, Social competence, Athletic competence, and Physical appearance domains (Ps < .05). Worse IXT control scores were associated with lower self-perception of Cognitive/Scholastic competence and Maternal acceptance.Conclusion Children with IXT experience reduced ERQOL, impaired motor skills, and lower self-perception. These findings highlight the broad developmental impact of IXT, beyond visual function.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".