MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4249997595 · doi:10.15586/jptcp.v24i3.643

Intelligence and fetal alcohol spectrum disorders

2019· article· en· W4249997595 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Vanessa K. De L. Ferreira, Marcelo Santos Cruz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical Pharmacology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWechsler Adult Intelligence ScalePsychologyFetal alcohol syndromeDevelopmental psychologyFetal alcoholPopulationIntelligence quotientVerbal reasoningWorking memoryInclusion (mineral)Clinical psychologyPsychiatryCognitionAlcoholMedicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The studies on intelligence in individuals with fetal alcohol exposure are conflicting. Some have found a relevant impairment in this population, while others found results that were consistent with the population at large. Objectives Describe the results of studies on intelligence in individuals with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders. Methods Indexed articles of the last 10 years were selected for an integrative literature review. After inclusion and exclusion criteria were satisfied 37 articles were selected. Results General intelligence, both verbal and non-verbal, is impaired in people who are prenatally exposed to alcohol. There is a tendency to a greater reduction in the Freedom from Distractibility/Working Memory Index of Wechsler Scales. Conclusions Reduction in intelligence seems to occur on a continuum similar to the fetal alcohol spectrum. The reduction of the Freedom from Distractibility/Working Memory Index appears to be a reflection of a greater impairment of mathematical ability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.361 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical PharmacologySame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207