The Syndrome of Infantile-Onset Saccade Initiation Delay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Infantile-onset saccade initiation delay (ISID), also known as congenital ocular motor apraxia, is characterized by the inability to initiate volitional horizontal saccades. Other abnormalities including developmental delay and ataxia have been reported. The frequency of these abnormalities is unknown. We performed a detailed review of the medical literature to quantify features of ISID. METHODS: We searched the English medical literature for articles related to ISID from 1952 to 2010. Whenever possible, patients were excluded if they had acquired SID, Joubert syndrome or neurodegenerative conditions. The minimum prevalence was calculated for each abnormality. RESULTS: Sixty-six articles with information on 288 patients were included in the analysis. Head thrusts were reported in 84.7%. Blinks without head thrusts were used to initiate saccades in 41%. The fast phases of the optokinetic response and vestibulo-ocular reflex were impaired in 69.8% and 34.4% respectively. Smooth ocular pursuit was abnormal in 33%. Global developmental delay occurred in 41.3%, speech or language delay in 36.5%, cognitive delay in 17%, hypotonia in 35.8%, motor delay in 48.6%, and ataxia/clumsiness in 49.3% of patients. Neuroimaging was performed on 197 patients and was normal in 39.1%. Abnormalities involved the cerebellum (24.9%), cerebrum (15.7%), other infratentorial structures (11.7%), and corpus callosum (6.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Infantile-onset saccade initiation delay is frequently associated with deficits in reflexive saccades and less frequently with impaired smooth ocular pursuit. Developmental delay, hypotonia, and ataxia occur frequently in ISID, suggesting more global brain impairment and not just a saccadic disorder.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".