Spectrum of neurodevelopmental disabilities in children with cerebellar malformations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Advances in perinatal care and neuroimaging techniques have increased the detection of cerebellar malformations (CBMs) in the fetus and young infant. As a result, this has necessitated a greater understanding of the neurodevelopmental consequences of CBMs on child development. The aim of this study was to delineate the impact of CBMs on long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes. METHOD: We conducted a cross-sectional study and systematically identified children with CBMs born between December 2000 and December 2006. We then performed follow-up magnetic resonance imaging studies, neurologic examination, and standardized neurodevelopmental outcome testing (Mullen Scales of Early Learning, Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale, Child Behavior Checklist, Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers, and the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory). RESULTS: Our sample comprised 49 children (29 males, 20 females; mean age, 28.4 mo, SD 16.4) with a CBM. Infants with evidence of acquired fetal or neonatal brain injury, intracranial birth trauma, inherited metabolic disease, or major pre- or postnatal cerebral ischemia were excluded. Our findings highlight that children with CBMs experience a high prevalence of neurologic, developmental, and functional disabilities including motor, cognitive, language, and social-behavioral deficits, as well as poor quality of life. The associated supratentorial anomalies, chromosomal findings, and malformations affecting the cerebellar vermis were significant independent predictors of neurodevelopmental disabilities in young children with CBMs. The associated supratentorial anomalies and chromosomal findings were also predictive of global developmental delay (p=0.01), cognitive impairment (p=0.03), gross and fine motor delay (p=0.02 and p=0.01 respectively), and positive screening for autism spectrum disorder (p=0.01). Additionally, malformations affecting the cerebellar vermis were significant independent predictors of expressive language (p=0.04) and gross motor delays (p=0.02). INTERPRETATION: Developmental surveillance and early intervention programs should be an integral part of the long-term follow-up of survivors of CBM.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".