MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Leber's congenital amaurosis: is there an autistic component?

2007· article· en· W1967316502 on OpenAlexaff
Elisa Fazzi, M. Rossi, Sabrina Signorini, Giorgio Rossi, P. E. Bianchi, G. Lanzi

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Medicine & Child Neurology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity Hospital Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmaurosisComponent (thermodynamics)MedicineAutismPsychologyOptometryPsychiatryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is much evidence in the literature suggesting that children with congenital blindness can also present autistic like features. The aetiopathogenetic and clinical significance of this association is still unclear. Given the central role played by vision in development, we set out to establish the significance of autistic-like behaviours in children with early-onset severe visual impairment. Our sample comprised 24 children (13 males, 11 females; mean age 5y 2mo; range 2-11y) affected by Leber's congenital amaurosis (LCA). The results of our administration of a modified Childhood Autism Rating Scale--excluding item VII (Visual Responsiveness)--showed that only four of the children gave an overall score indicating the presence of autism (moreover, of mild/moderate degree). Hardly any of the children in our LCA sample presented major dysfunctions in their relationships with other people or in their social and emotional responsiveness, thus allowing us to exclude a genuine comorbidity with a picture of autism. Indeed, the risk facing the visually impaired child seems to concern their early interactive experiences, which may be affected by their inability to connect with others, and may be prevented through the development of specific strategies of intervention.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations36
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental Medicine & Child NeurologySame topicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesFrench-language works237,207