MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7126022730 · doi:10.5281/hra.v3i6.6756

Profil Épidémioclinique des Anomalies Ophtalmologiques chez les Enfants Porteurs de Troubles Cognitifs à Kinshasa

2025· article· fr· W7126022730 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thérèse Masumu Lungambi, Christine B Muteba, PB Lotola Lushima, Jérôme Gédikondele Sokolo

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionNicotine dependenceAffect (linguistics)Cognitive development

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RÉSUMÉ Introduction. Les anomalies ophtalmologiques sont fréquentes surtout chez les enfants avec troubles cognitifs. La présente étude avait pour objectif de déterminer la fréquence et les types d’anomalies ophtalmologiques chez les enfants avec troubles cognitifs. Matériels et méthodes. Nous avons mené une étude transversale et descriptive entre octobre 2023 et décembre 2023 auprès de 46 enfants âgés de 7 à 17 ans atteints des troubles cognitifs à la fondation pédiatrique de Kimbondo/Kinshasa-Rd. Congo. Ils ont été examinés de façon aléatoire après sélection définie par rapport aux variables d’intérêt. Les participants ont bénéficié d’un examen ophtalmologique complet et d’une évaluation cognitive à l’aide de l’échelle de MoCA. Résultats. L’âge médian était de 13,0(10,0-17,0) ans. Le sexe masculin a représenté 54,3% de l’échantillon. L’atteinte cognitive était légère chez 10,9% et sévère chez 6,5% des enfants. Tous les enfants avaient au moins une anomalie ophtalmologique. Les troubles de la réfraction (97,0%), les troubles de la stéréoscopie (34,4%) et le strabisme (18,7%) étaient les anomalies les plus fréquentes. Une déficience visuelle a été répertoriée chez 12,5% d’enfants. Conclusion. Les manifestations ophtalmologiques sont fréquentes chez les enfants ayant les déficits cognitifs. Elles sont dominées par les amétropies ceci est en accord avec les résultats de la plupart de dépistage ophtalmologique de ces enfants via le système de santé scolaire contribuerait à une détection et une prise en charge précoce de ces anomalies. ABSTRACT Introduction. Ophthalmic abnormalities are common, particularly among children with cognitive impairments. This study aimed to determine the frequency and types of ophthalmic disorders in children with cognitive deficits. Materials and Methods. We conducted a cross-sectional, descriptive study between October 2023 and December 2023, involving 46 children aged 7 to 17 years with cognitive impairments at the Kimbondo Pediatric Foundation in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo. Participants were randomly selected based on predefined inclusion criteria. All underwent a comprehensive ophthalmic examination and cognitive assessment using the MoCA (Montreal Cognitive Assessment) scale. Results. The median age was 13.0 (10.0–17.0) years, with males representing 54.3% of the sample. Cognitive impairment was mild in 10.9% and severe in 6.5% of the children. All children had at least one ophthalmic abnormality. The most frequent disorders included efractive errors (97.0%), impaired stereopsis (34.4%) and strabismus (18.7%). Visual impairment was documented in 12.5% of the children. Conclusion. Ophthalmic manifestations are highly prevalent in children with cognitive deficits, with refractive errors (ametropia) being the most common—consistent with findings from most school-based vision screening programs. Implementing systematic school health ophthalmologic screenings could facilitate early detection and management of these conditions.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.335
GPT teacher head0.620
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies→French-language works237,207→