Long-Term Intellectual and Fine Motor Outcomes in Spina Bifida Are Related to Myelomeningocele Repair and Shunt Intervention History
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Lifespan outcomes of simultaneous versus sequential myelomeningocele repair and shunt placement or effects of repeated shunt revisions on specific domains of IQ or fine motor dexterity are largely unknown. The current study addressed these gaps in a large cohort of children and adults with spina bifida myelomeningocele (SBM). METHODS: Participants between 7 and 44 years of age with SBM and shunted hydrocephalus were recruited from international clinics at two time points. Each participant completed a standardized neuropsychological evaluation that included estimates of IQ and fine motor dexterity. Simultaneous versus sequential surgical repair and number of shunt revisions were examined in relation to long-term IQ and fine motor scores. RESULTS: Simultaneous myelomeningocele repair and shunting were associated with more frequent shunt revisions, as well as to lower Full Scale and verbal IQ scores, controlling for number of shunt revisions. More shunt revisions across study time points were associated with higher nonverbal IQ (NVIQ) scores. No effects were observed on fine motor dexterity. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate generally greater influence of surgery type over shunt revision history on outcomes in well-managed hydrocephalus. Findings supported apparent, domain-specific benefits of sequential compared to simultaneous surgery across the lifespan in SBM. Higher NVIQ scores with greater number of additional shunt revisions across surgery type supported positive outcomes with effective surgical management for hydrocephalus.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".