Corpus callosum injury after neurosurgical intervention for posthemorrhagic ventricular dilatation and association with neurodevelopmental outcome at 2 years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Direct injury to the corpus callosum (CC) due to neurosurgical interventions in infants with posthemorrhagic ventricular dilatation (PHVD) has not been reported in the literature. The authors observed a subset of infants who had suffered penetrating CC injury after neurosurgical interventions for PHVD and hypothesized that this pattern of injury may result in suboptimal CC maturation and neurodevelopmental impairment. METHODS: In this multicenter, retrospective, observational study, 100 preterm and 17 full-term infants with PHVD were included and compared with 23 preterm controls. Both neonatal and postneonatal brain MRI scans were assessed for injury, and measurements were performed on postneonatal MRI scans at 2 years' corrected age. Neurodevelopmental outcome was assessed at 2 years' corrected age. RESULTS: A total of 269 brain MRI scans of 140 infants were included. Of infants with PHVD, 48 (41%) had penetrating CC injury following neurosurgical interventions. The median (IQR) CC midsagittal surface area was smaller in infants with CC injury when compared with infants with PHVD who had intact CC and controls (190 mm2 [149-262 mm2] vs 268 mm2 [206-318 mm2] vs 289 mm2 [246-320 mm2], respectively; p < 0.001). In the univariate analysis, the area of the CC was associated with cognitive Z score (coefficient 0.009 [95% CI 0.005-0.012], p < 0.001) and motor Z score (coefficient 0.009 [95% CI 0.006-0.012], p < 0.001). In the multivariable model, CC injury was not independently associated with cognitive and motor Z score after adjusting for gestational age and presence of periventricular hemorrhagic infarction (coefficient 0.04 [95% CI -0.36 to 0.46] and -0.37 [95% CI -0.83 to 0.09], p = 0.7 and 0.1, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: CC injury was not uncommon following neurosurgical interventions for PHVD in both preterm and full-term infants. At the age of 2 years, the CC midsagittal surface area was smaller in infants with injury, but CC injury was not independently associated with cognitive and motor outcomes at 2 years' corrected age.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".