Timing of Thyroid Hormone Action in the Developing Brain: Clinical Observations and Experimental Findings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The original concept of the critical period of thyroid hormone (TH) action on brain development was proposed to identify the postnatal period during which TH supplement must be provided to a child with congenital hypothyroidism to prevent mental retardation. As neuropsychological tools have become more sensitive, it has become apparent that even mild TH insufficiency in humans can produce measurable deficits in very specific neuropsychological functions, and that the specific consequences of TH deficiency depends on the precise developmental timing of the deficiency. Models of maternal hypothyroidism, hypothyroxinaemia and congenital hyperthyroidism have provided these insights. If the TH deficiency occurs early in pregnancy, the offspring display problems in visual attention, visual processing (i.e. acuity and strabismus) and gross motor skills. If it occurs later in pregnancy, children are at additional risk of subnormal visual (i.e. contrast sensitivity) and visuospatial skills, as well as slower response speeds and fine motor deficits. Finally, if TH insufficiency occurs after birth, language and memory skills are most predominantly affected. Although the experimental literature lags behind clinical studies in providing a mechanistic explanation for each of these observations, recent studies confirm that the specific action of TH on brain development depends upon developmental timing, and studies informing us about molecular mechanisms of TH action are generating hypotheses concerning possible mechanisms to account for these pleiotropic actions.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".