Specific language impairment as the prominent feature in a patient with a low‐level trisomy 21 mosaicism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The extent and severity of the disabilities is variable among individuals with Down syndrome, although generally characterized by a range of physical and intellectual conditions, including language impairment. Whether the language deficit is due to the intellectual disability (ID) or associated to the supernumerary or portion of chromosome 21 is still debated. METHODS: Karyotyping was performed on blood lymphocyte and skin fibroblasts. Fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis was performed on cultured lymphocytes and buccal smear cells. RESULTS: The trisomy 21 (T21) mosaicism was characterized by 0.7-10% of mosaic cells in the different tissues, in a 14-year-old girl presenting an intellectual development within the normal range and specific language impairment (SLI) as the only prominent feature. CONCLUSION: This case illustrates the wide range of phenotypical abnormalities possibly associated with T21 mosaicism. We propose that SLI is indeed a phenotypic trait specific to Down syndrome rather than subsequent to the ID most often associated to the syndrome.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".