Basilar artery strokes in children: good outcomes with conservative medical treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To describe outcomes and outcome predictors in childhood basilar artery stroke (BAS). METHOD: We prospectively enrolled children with BAS with or without basilar artery occlusion (BAO) in the Toronto Children's Stroke Registry from 1992 to 2009. We assessed presenting features and outcomes including Pediatric Stroke Outcome Measure scores. RESULTS: Among 578 children with acute arterial ischemic stroke, 27 had BAS (4.6% including neonates, 6% excluding neonates). Twenty-four (14 males, 10 females) children met study criteria (mean age at stroke was 8 y 10 mo; range 0-17 y). Eleven children had BAO. Aspirin or anticoagulation was given to 15 children. None received tissue plasminogen activator or endovascular treatments. At mean follow-up (3 y 2 mo, range 1 mo-11 y 8 mo), 12 had a 'good outcome' (seven normal, five insignificant deficit) and 12 had 'poor outcome' (10 moderate or severe deficit, two acute deaths). Larger infarct size (≥50% of axial brainstem diameter) independently predicted poor outcome (p=0.02; odds ratio 21.2, 95% confidence interval 1.6-274.9) but not BAO, altered level of consciousness, or age. INTERPRETATION: Compared with adults, in childhood BAS death is rare and survivors frequently have good outcomes. Aggressive endovascular interventions may not be justifiable in this population.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".