The Effect of Kawasaki Disease on Cognition and Behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there are associated long-term deficits in the cognitive, academic, or behavioral outcomes of children with a previous episode of Kawasaki disease. DESIGN: Cohort analytic study. SETTING: A tertiary care pediatric hospital in Ottawa, Ontario. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-two patients with a past diagnosis of Kawasaki disease. Siblings of the patients with Kawasaki disease were eligible to be controls. MEASURES: A blinded psychometrist (Y.K.) assessed cognition by the appropriate Wechsler Intelligence scale, academic achievement by the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test, and behavior by the Achenbach Child Behavior Checklist. RESULTS: No differences were found in cognitive or academic measures and the mean scores corresponded closely to national norms. Parents rated their children who had Kawasaki disease as having significantly more internalizing (P<.03) and attentional (P<.02) behavior problems than controls; the risk of a clinically significant behavioral score was 3.3 times greater (P<.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-9.9) than for sibling controls. CONCLUSIONS: While no effect on cognitive development or academic performance was demonstrated, these results provide preliminary indication of a post-Kawasaki disease deficit in internalizing and attentional behavior.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".