The course of cognitive‐behavioral development in children with the <i>FMR1</i> mutation, Williams–Beuren syndrome, and neurofibromatosis type 1: The effect of gender
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The course of cognitive-behavioral development in children with intellectual disabilities produced by genetic disorders has only recently begun to be examined systematically. Unfortunately, these studies are few in number. Previously, we examined cognitive-behavioral development in children with the fragile X (FMR1) mutation and found longitudinal decreases in both IQ and adaptive behavior (DQ) scores in most males and females with the full mutation. In this study, we examine longitudinal changes in IQ and DQ in children with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) and Williams-Beuren Syndrome (WBS) by examining differences in composite IQ and DQ scores between the first test (T1) and retest (T2), and compare their developmental trajectory to children with the FMR1 mutation. Sixty-five children with the FMR1 mutation, or NF1, or WBS, ages 4-16 years, were retested two years after initial testing with the Stanford-Binet 4th Edition (SBFE) and the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale (VABS). In addition to significant longitudinal declines in IQ and DQ noted previously in children with the FMR1 mutation, we found significant decreases in IQ in males compared to females in the remainder of our sample. We also observed statistically significant decreases in DQ scores among children the FMR1 mutation, as noted previously, but not among children with NF1 or WBS. Moreover, significant declines were found only among males with the FMR1 mutation. Unlike declines in IQ scores, decreases in DQ were not significantly different between males and females.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".