<i>Where</i> and <i>what</i> visuospatial processing in adolescents with congenital hypothyroidism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Visuospatial processing is accomplished in distinct neuroanatomic pathways. One such pathway, known as the where pathway, involves a dorsal route through magnocellular thalamic cells to occipital and parietal cortices and conveys location and motion information. A second pathway, known as the what pathway, involves a ventral route through parvocellular thalamic cells to occipital and temporal cortices and conveys color and form information. The where pathway is thought to be responsible for processing spatial relationships while the what pathway is responsible for object identification. Children with early-treated congenital hypothyroidism (CH) who exhibit selective visuospatial deficits may provide a good model to study the differential development of these pathways. Because children with CH lacked thyroid hormone at a time when needed by developing brain regions such as the parietal cortex, these children may be affected to a greater degree on tasks tapping where but not what pathway processing. We tested this hypothesis via retrospective analysis of their performance on 6 spatial tasks. Compared were 49 adolescents with CH and 49 matched control participants. On the basis of confirmatory factor analysis, tasks were assigned to either where or that pathway groupings. A repeated measures ANOVA showed the CH group was impaired relative to a normal comparison group only on where pathway tasks. Regression analyses indicated that severity of early hypothyroidism was the strongest predictor of where pathway processing but had no effect on what pathway tasks. It is concluded that thyroid hormone is required during late gestation and early life for the normal development of the where aspects of visuospatial processing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".