Clinical and Radiologic Spectrum of Septo-optic Dysplasia: Review of 17 Cases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We retrospectively reviewed the clinical and radiologic characteristics of 17 individuals with septo-optic dysplasia (SOD) and attempted to identify correlations between imaging findings, clinical features, and neurodevelopmental outcome. Surprisingly, only 1 (6%) individual was classified as classic SOD (with septum pellucidum/corpus callosum dysgenesis), 3 (18%) as SOD-like (with normal septum pellucidum/corpus callosum) and the majority, 13 (76%), as SOD-plus (with cortical brain malformation). Cortical abnormalities included schizencephaly, polymicrogyria, and gray matter heterotopias. All individuals had optic nerve hypoplasia, 11 (65%) had endocrinologic deficits, and 13 (76%) had abnormal cerebral midlines. Seven individuals (41%) had all 3 features. Neurodevelopmental outcome was abnormal in 13 (78%), ranging from mild to severe developmental delay. Individuals with SOD-plus did not have more severe neurologic deficits than individuals with classic or SOD-like subgroups. Thus, SOD is clinically and radiologically heterogeneous, and cortical abnormalities are very common. Neurodevelopmental deficits are very prevalent, and of wide-ranging severity.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".