Focal thinning of the posterior corpus callosum: Normal variant or post-traumatic?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The corpus callosum (CC) can be affected by childhood traumatic brain injury (TBI), through focal lesions, reductions in size and arrested development. Little is known, however, about what constitutes normal CC shape and appearance and how it may be affected in the long-term after early TBI. METHODS: In this study, the appearance of the CC was investigated in individuals with TBI assessed 10 years post-injury (n = 52, mean age = 16.82 years, SD = 3.55 years, 24 male) and compared to age-matched healthy controls (n = 44, mean age = 15.77 years, SD = 1.21 years, 18 male). A simple visual analysis technique was used to code the appearance of the CC according to location of focal thinning and severity of thinning and results between groups were compared using Chi-square analysis. RESULTS: A significantly higher proportion of patients with childhood TBI had focal posterior thinning of the CC than age-matched controls (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The findings call into question previous conclusions that focal posterior thinning is a normal variant of development. Instead, attenuations of the posterior portion of the CC in the long-term may reflect altered cortical and callosal development as a result of early brain injury, although the functional significance of this 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".