Columns of the Fornix, Not to Be Mistaken for the Cavum Septi Pellucidi on Prenatal Sonography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Visualization of the cavum septi pellucidi (CSP) is considered an integral part of the prenatal second-and third-trimester sonographic evaluations of the fetal neural axis. We have noted that another anatomic structure, the columns of the fornix, can be mistaken for the CSP and result in the missed diagnosis of agenesis of the corpus callosum. METHODS: We describe a case in which the columns of the fornix were misinterpreted as representing the CSP during a sonographic evaluation at 18 weeks' gestation. After a follow-up sonogram at 35 weeks, agenesis of the corpus callosum was detected. A retrospective evaluation of the prevalence of forniceal columns was then performed in 100 consecutive sonograms of pregnancies between 18 and 24 weeks' gestation. A prospective study was then performed in 20 patients to determine the prevalence of visualization of the columns of the fornix. RESULTS: In 86 of 100 patients, the columns of the fornix were retrospectively identified as discrete and separate structures from the CSP. When additional views were obtained prospectively in the forebrain, the fornix could be identified in all 20 patients. CONCLUSIONS: The columns of the fornix may simulate the appearance of the CSP on second- and third-trimester sonograms. The distinction between these structures can be made because the columns of the fornix will show a linear reflection (3 lines) at their interface, whereas the CSP will appear as a fluid-filled triangular or rectangular fluid-filled space without a central line.
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 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".