Late Emergence of Cognitive Deficits After Unilateral Neonatal Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Neonatal arterial ischemic stroke (AIS) affects a surprisingly large number of children each year, yet little is known about the long-term neuropsychological implications. METHODS: Using age-appropriate Wechsler scales of intellectual ability, this longitudinal study examined 26 children with a history of acutely diagnosed unilateral neonatal AIS as preschoolers (3 years 6 months to 5 years 11 months) and again as grade-school students (6 years 1 month to 12 years 5 months), and contrasted performance with the normative sample of the test. RESULTS: As preschoolers, patients' performance did not differ from the normative sample for Full Scale IQ, Verbal IQ, or Performance IQ, and there were no significant differences associated with infarct laterality. As school-age children, performance was significantly lower than the normative sample for Full Scale IQ Working Memory and Processing Speed, but not for Verbal IQ or Performance IQ. Contrasts between Time 1 and Time 2 revealed a significant decline in Full Scale IQ, which reflected emerging deficits in nonverbal reasoning, working memory, and processing speed. Individual subject analyses revealed that 69% of the children showed significant declines in 1 or more IQ index measures. We found no significant differences in cognitive performance associated with lesion laterality, though males performed more poorly than females on several cognitive measures at Time 2. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that children with unilateral neonatal stroke, particularly males, are at increased risk for emerging deficits in higher-level cognitive skills during the school years. Continued follow-up of these children is needed, even those with no apparent deficits as toddlers or preschoolers.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".