Relationship between 4-month functional brain network topology and 24-month neurodevelopmental outcome in children with congenital heart disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Survivors of complex forms of congenital heart disease (CHD)∗ are at high risk of neurodevelopmental disabilities. Neuroimaging studies have pointed to brain anomalies and immature networks in infants with CHD, yet less is known about their functional network topology and associations with neurodevelopment. To characterize the functional network topology in 4-month-old infants with repaired CHD, we compared graph theory metrics measured using resting-state functional near-infrared spectroscopy (rs-fNIRS) between infants with CHD (n = 22) and healthy controls (n = 30). We also investigated the moderating effect of graph theory metrics on the relationship between group (CHD vs. Controls) and developmental outcomes at 24 months. At 4 months, both groups presented similar functional brain network topology. At 24 months, children with CHD had lower scores on the language scale and the expressive communication subscale of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition (Bayley-III), as well as lower scores on the Grammatical Form scale of the MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventory (MBCDI). The relationship between group and expressive language was moderated by the normalized characteristic path length (λ) and the degree (k). Although infants with CHD have functional brain topology similar to that of healthy controls, our findings suggest that they do not benefit from an optimal functional brain organization in comparison with healthy infants.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".