ISDN2014_0197: An in‐depth analysis of saccade metrics in children with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To characterize the metrics of saccadic eye movements, researchers have relied primarily on amplitude, duration and peak velocity (the “main sequence”). Although previous studies have found that children with FASD make saccades that are quantifiably different from age-matched controls, an in-depth analysis of the metrics of saccades in children with FASD has not been conducted. Participants for this dataset were aged 5–18 years either with FASD (n = 70), or typically developing controls (n = 112). Participants performed a prosaccade task, in which they made visually-guided saccades to peripheral targets in the right and left hemifields. Metric parameters (accuracy, duration, velocity, amplitude, slope of the velocity curves) were analyzed for sex and group differences. In the control group the initial saccade of female participants had a greater amplitude and velocity than males. In contrast, this difference was not present in the FASD group, and the performance of females in the FASD group was selectively reduced compared to females in the control group. The accuracy was significantly poorer in the FASD group compared to controls, which introduced significantly greater variability in the data for the FASD group. Therefore, we conducted analyses including only those trials in which the saccade successfully reached the target. In this restricted data set, the FASD group had significantly lower velocity and duration, but not amplitude, compared with controls. Additionally, the slope of the velocity profile was selectively decreased during the deceleration phase but not the acceleration phase in the FASD group, which led to a significantly different skew index. These data suggest that children with FASD exhibit deficits in eye movement control and sensory-motor integration that implicate impairment in cerebellar and/or brain stem circuits. Moreover, we show for the first time that prenatal alcohol exposure may have a sexually dimorphic impact on eye movement control, with females exhibiting differential vulnerability.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".