A model of neurocognitive function in spina bifida over the life span
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spina bifida myelomeningocele (SBM), a neural tube defect that is the product of a complex pattern of gene-environment interactions, is associated with naturally occurring, systematic variability in the neural phenotype and in environmental factors that lead to systematic variability in the cognitive phenotype. We characterize the basis for variability in the cognitive phenotype of children with SBM with reference to a model of key biological, cognitive, and environmental events unfolding over the course of development from infancy to middle age. The cognitive phenotype is not domain-specific, but represents manifestations of unobservable constructs involving associative and assembled processing, the latter directly reflecting the impact of the neural phenotype on core deficits involving movement, timing, and attention orienting. The expression of the cognitive phenotype is variable, being moderated by features of the neural phenotype involving secondary CNS insults (such as hydrocephalus) that impair assembled processing, as well as by environmental factors (such as poverty, parenting, and education) that impair associative processing. The preservation of strengths in associative processing depends in part on the severity of the CNS deficits in SBM and the impact of the environment.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".