Deficits in Eye Movement Control in Children With Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prenatal exposure to alcohol can result in a spectrum of adverse developmental outcomes in offspring, collectively termed fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD). Deficits in executive function--the psychological processes involved in controlling voluntary goal-oriented behavior--are prevalent in FASD. Oculomotor tasks have been designed as highly sensitive tools to evaluate components of executive function. Because of the extensive overlap in the brain areas controlling eye movements and those affected in FASD, we hypothesized that individuals with FASD display specific neurobehavioral abnormalities that can be quantified with eye movement testing. METHODS: Subjects (8-12 years old) were instructed to look either toward (prosaccade) or away from (antisaccade) a stimulus that appeared in the peripheral visual field. Two fixation conditions were used. In the gap condition, the central fixation point (FP) was removed before the appearance of the peripheral stimulus; in the overlap condition, the FP remained illuminated. Saccadic reaction times (SRTs, time from stimulus appearance to saccade initiation), direction errors (saccades made in the incorrect direction relative to instruction), and express saccades (short-latency: SRT=90-140 ms) were measured to assess automatic and volitional saccade control. RESULTS: Compared with controls, FASD children had elongated reaction times, excessive direction errors, and no express saccades. Metric analysis of correct prosaccades revealed a trend toward increased saccadic duration and decreased saccadic velocity in FASD subjects. CONCLUSION: These results reflect deficits in executive function and motor control, and are consistent with dysfunction of the frontal lobes, possibly due to disrupted inhibitory mechanisms. Therefore, eye movement tasks may be powerful and easy tools for assessing executive function deficits in FASD.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".