Risk of Recurrent Arterial Ischemic Stroke in Childhood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Published cohorts of children with arterial ischemic stroke (AIS) in the 1990s to early 2000s reported 5-year cumulative recurrence rates approaching 20%. Since then, utilization of antithrombotic agents for secondary stroke prevention in children has increased. We sought to determine rates and predictors of recurrent stroke in the current era. METHODS: The Vascular Effects of Infection in Pediatric Stroke (VIPS) study enrolled 355 children with AIS at 37 international centers from 2009 to 2014 and followed them prospectively for recurrent stroke. Index and recurrent strokes underwent central review and confirmation, as well as central classification of causes of stroke, including arteriopathies. Other predictors were measured via parental interview or chart review. RESULTS: Of the 355 children, 354 survived their acute index stroke, and 308 (87%) were treated with an antithrombotic medication. During a median follow-up of 2.0 years (interquartile range, 1.0-3.0), 40 children had a recurrent AIS, and none had a hemorrhagic stroke. The cumulative stroke recurrence rate was 6.8% (95% confidence interval, 4.6%-10%) at 1 month and 12% (8.5%-15%) at 1 year. The sole predictor of recurrence was the presence of an arteriopathy, which increased the risk of recurrence 5-fold when compared with an idiopathic AIS (hazard ratio, 5.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.8-14). The 1-year recurrence rate was 32% (95% confidence interval, 18%-51%) for moyamoya, 25% (12%-48%) for transient cerebral arteriopathy, and 19% (8.5%-40%) for arterial dissection. CONCLUSIONS: Children with AIS, particularly those with arteriopathy, remain at high risk for recurrent AIS despite increased utilization of antithrombotic agents. Therapies directed at the arteriopathies themselves are needed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".