Factors Associated With Strabismus in Spina Bifida Myelomeningocele
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Higher prevalence of strabismus in individuals with spina bifida myelomeningocele (SBM) has previously been attributed to hydrocephalus; however, SBM is associated with many other complications. This study investigates the relation between strabismus and other factors in SBM. METHODS: Children aged 3 to 18 years with SBM (n = 112) received an eye examination including assessment of ocular alignment by cover or Hirschberg test. Gestational age, respiratory distress at birth, birth weight, maternal age at birth, number of shunt revisions, and spinal lesion level were also obtained. The relation between these factors and strabismus was analyzed. RESULTS: Forty-two participants had strabismus. Maternal age (P = .4) and respiratory distress (P = .6) were not significantly related to strabismus. Lower birth weight was suggestive of a relation with strabismus (logistic regression, P = .05) and younger gestational age was related to strabismus (logistic regression, P = .01). Participants who had at least one shunt revision were more likely to have strabismus (Fisher's exact test, P = .038). Spinal lesion level was significantly related to strabismus with increased likelihood of strabismus for spinal lesions closer to the brain (Wald chi-square, 1,100 = 4.29, P = .038). CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that several factors are associated with strabismus in SBM. Some of these factors (lower birth weight and younger gestational age) are associated with strabismus in the general population, whereas the association of strabismus and level of spinal lesion may be unique to SBM and may be related to the more severe brain dysmorphology associated with upper level spinal lesions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".