Reduced Visual Function Associated with Infantile Spasms in Children on Vigabatrin Therapy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To use visual evoked potential (VEP) testing to determine whether visual deficits are present in children with a history of vigabatrin use. METHODS: Contrast sensitivity and visual acuity were assessed by visual evoked potential testing and compared between 28 children (mean age, 4.90 +/- 4.92 years) with seizure disorders who had taken vigabatrin and 14 typically developing children (mean age, 3.14 +/- 1.70 years). Exclusion criteria were heritable eye disease, suspected cortical visual impairment, nystagmus, and prematurity >2 weeks. The effects of the following factors on contrast sensitivity and visual acuity were examined: type of seizure (infantile spasms versus other), ERG result, duration of vigabatrin therapy, cumulative dosage of vigabatrin, and other seizure medications (other versus no other medication). RESULTS: Contrast sensitivity and visual acuity were reduced in vigabatrin-treated children with infantile spasms compared with vigabatrin-treated children with other seizure disorders and typically developing control subjects. The other factors examined had no significant effect on contrast sensitivity or visual acuity, with adjustment for seizure type. CONCLUSIONS: Children with infantile spasms on vigabatrin may have compromised visual function, even in the absence of suspected cortical visual impairment. The children tested in the present study have reduced vision, probably associated with infantile spasms rather than vigabatrin.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it