The neuropsychological phenotype of velocardiofacial syndrome (VCFS): Relationship to psychopathology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children with velocardiofacial syndrome (VCFS; N=14) and a comparison group of siblings (N=8) underwent comprehensive neuropsychological assessment to examine the relationship between cognitive functioning and psychopathology. Significant group differences were obtained on tests of full scale and verbal intellectual functioning and perceptual-motor skills. With the exception of performance on tests of attention and executive functioning, children with VCFS displayed a profile consistent with nonverbal learning disability (NLD). However, within group comparisons revealed significantly poorer visuospatial intellectual and nonverbal memory functioning in sibling controls as well. No significant group differences were obtained on tests of motor speed, academic, language, attention, memory, or executive functioning, with significant variability in children with VCFS frequently accounting for the lack of robust differences. Parent-report measures revealed profiles consistent with ADHD. No clinically significant symptoms of psychosis, depression or anxiety were noted on either self- or parent-report measures. Wisconsin Card Sorting Test performance was found to be highly and negatively correlated with the Thought Problems subscale of the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) for VCFS children only, suggesting a possible at-risk indicator for later onset psychopathology.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".