MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104623687 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1233825100

Developmental amnesia and its relationship to degree of hippocampal atrophy

2003· article· en· W2104623687 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth Isaacs, Faraneh Vargha‐Khadem, Kate E. Watkins, Alan Lucas, Mortimer Mishkin, David G. Gadian

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthMedical Research CouncilU.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesNational Institutes of HealthGreat Ormond Street Hospital for ChildrenHealth Service ExecutiveWellcome Trust
KeywordsAmnesiaHippocampal formationAbnormalityPsychologyMemory impairmentMemory disorderHippocampusAudiologyCognitive disorderNeuroscienceCognitionMedicineCognitive impairmentPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two groups of adolescents, one born preterm and one with a diagnosis of developmental amnesia, were compared with age-matched normal controls on measures of hippocampal volume and memory function. Relative to control values, the preterm group values showed a mean bilateral reduction in hippocampal volume of 8-9% (ranging to 23%), whereas the developmental amnesic group values showed a reduction of 40% (ranging from 27% to 56%). Despite equivalent IQ and immediate memory scores in the two study groups, there were marked differences between them on a wide variety of verbal and visual delayed memory tasks. Consistent with their diagnosis, the developmental amnesic group was impaired relative to both other groups on nearly all delayed memory measures. The preterm group, by contrast, was significantly impaired relative to the controls on only a few memory measures, i.e., route following and prospective memory. We suggest that early hippocampal pathology leads to the disabling memory impairments associated with developmental amnesia when the volume of this structure is reduced below normal by approximately 20-30% on each side. Whether this is a sufficient condition for the disorder or whether abnormality in other brain regions is also necessary remains to be determined.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.222
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.121 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations116
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207