Prenatal ultrasound reassessment of the corpus callosum based on cortical connectivity information
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Routine prenatal ultrasound assessment of the corpus callosum (CC) does not reflect information on fibrous connections. The primary purpose was to construct detailed reference ranges of quantitative characteristics of the foetal CC based on cortical connectivity information. Secondary goals were to examine for sex differences and assess the validity of the measurement technique for cases with CC dysplasia. Material and methods: Pregnant women referred to a tertiary centre for sonographic examination were recruited to undergo a detailed foetal scan from 19 to 40 weeks. The foetal CC was divided into 5 distinct segments using the Hofer & Frahm classification technique. The thickness of each segment and the overall length of the CC were measured. Additionally, a segmental evaluation was conducted on partial agenesis of the CC. The inter- and intraobserver variability were assessed by interclass correlation coefficients. Regression analysis was used to determine the association between the biological measurements and gestational age. Results: A total of 852 foetuses (403 males and 449 females) were included in the final analysis. Intra- and interobserver reliability coefficients ranged from 0.86 to 0.98 and 0.84 to 0.97, respectively. Reference ranges were established for the thickness and length of its segments. We observed that the biometric measurements of the foetal CC showed a curvilinear increase with gestational age. There was a statistically significant sex effect for the CC. At the average gestation age 29.6 weeks, the genu, anterior midbody, posterior midbody, and isthmus of male foetuses were 0.06280 mm, 0.04435 mm, 0.01731 mm, and 0.01556 mm, respectively, thicker than those of female foetuses, whereas the splenium of the female foetus was 0.06583 mm thicker than the male foetus. Conclusions: The study uncovers distinct patterns of thickness and length growth in the foetal CC and establishes precise reference ranges. These findings can aid in evaluating normal brain development and conducting comprehensive assessments of CC abnormalities.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".