Visuospatial, Visuoperceptual, and Visuoconstructive Abilities in Congenital Hypothyroidism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals with congenital hypothyroidism (CH), even those diagnosed and treated early, experience selective cognitive deficits, the most striking of which involves the visuocognitive domain. However, the range and nature of their visuocognitive disturbances is not fully understood. We assessed a range of higher-order visuocognitive abilities in 19 children and adolescents with CH and 19 age- and sex-matched typically developing peers (TD) using a battery of neuropsychological tests and a novel self-report measure of sense of direction. CH scored lower than TD on direct tests of visuocognitive function (judging line orientation, parts-to-whole localization, copying three-dimensional block towers, discriminating designs, and matching unfamiliar faces in ¾ profile-view) as well as on self-reported problems in spatial ability. Visuocognitive problems were not global as CH and TD did not differ at copying two-dimensional block designs, mentally rotating and matching abstract shapes, or at matching unfamiliar front-view faces, design features, or designs that engaged either figure-ground segregation, visual constancy, or closure. Early and concurrent thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) levels were associated with visuocognitive ability, although attention and working memory were not. Individuals with CH exhibit selective visuocognitive weaknesses, some of which are related to early and concurrent TSH levels.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".