MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Annotation: Deconstructing the attention deficit in fragile X syndrome: a developmental neuropsychological approach

2004· review· en· W1979794507 on OpenAlexaff
Kim Cornish, J Turk, John Wilding, Vicki Sudhalter, Fehmidah Munir, R. Frank Kooy, Randi J. Hagerman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuropsychologyPsychologyCognitionExecutive functionsFragile X syndromeCognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologyNeurosciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Fragile X syndrome is one of the world's leading hereditary causes of developmental delay in males. The past decade has witnessed an explosion of research that has begun to unravel the condition at its various levels: from the genetic and brain levels to the cognitive level, and then to the environmental and behavioural levels. Our aim in this review is to attempt to integrate some of the extensive body of knowledge to move the research a step closer to understanding how the dynamics of atypical development can influence the specific cognitive and behavioural end-states frequently observed in children and adolescents with fragile X syndrome. METHODS: We conducted a review of the current neuropsychological and neuropsychiatric approaches that have attempted to delineate the pattern of 'spared' and 'impaired' functions associated with the phenotype. RESULTS: The profile of findings suggests that fragile X syndrome should not be viewed merely as a catalogue of spared and impaired cognitive functions or modules. Instead, there appears to be a process of almost gradual modularisation whereby cognitive mechanisms become domain specific as a function of development itself (Karmiloff-Smith, 1992). The results of a decade of intense research point towards an early weakness in one or more components of executive control rather than single, static higher-level deficits (e.g., spatial cognition, speech processing). This weakness affects both the development of more complex functions and current performance. CONCLUSIONS: The prevailing tendency to interpret developmental disorders in terms of fixed damage to distinct modular functions needs to be reconsidered. We offer this review as an example of an alternative approach, attempting to identify an initial deficit and its consequences for the course of development. Through better definition of the cognitive and behavioural phenotype, in combination with current progress in brain imaging techniques and molecular studies, the next decade should continue to hold exciting promise for fragile X syndrome and other neurodevelopmental disorders.

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)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.964
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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations86
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Child Psychology and PsychiatrySame topicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersFrench-language works237,207