PREDICTORS OF DYSTONIA IN CHILDHOOD BASAL GANGLIA STROKE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Dystonia may result from focal lesions of the basal ganglia secondary to ischemia. The purpose of this study was to establish the incidence, course, outcome and predictors of dystonia in basal ganglia stroke in children. Understanding the predictors may lead to earlier diagnosis and treatment of dystonia in this population. Methods: A consecutive cohort study of children with basal ganglia stroke seen at two North American children's tertiary care centers from January 1992 to December 2004 was undertaken. Children aged 6 months to 17 years with basal ganglia lesions were included in the study. Data were collected on age, gender, etiology, initial clinical presentation, radiographic findings and outcome on follow-up. The mean time for follow-up was 4.5 years (range 1 month-10.5years). Results: Of 100 children with basal ganglia stroke 21% went on to develop dystonia. 20/90 (23%) of the children who developed dystonia were under age 10 at the time of stroke, 1/10 (10%) children was over 10. (p=0.09, odds ratio 2.5) More girls were found to develop dystonia 10/35 (29%) as compared to 11/65 males (17%) [OR=1.96]. Infarcts in the left basal ganglia were found to result in dystonia more often (24%) than right basal ganglia lesions (16%). The median time of onset of dystonia after stroke was 6–12 months (range 0–8years). In 14 children (67%) dystonia was severe requireing medical treatment. Conclusion: Dystonia occurs in 21% of childhood basal ganglia strokes. There is a trend that it is more likely to occur in younger children and in girls (statistically not significant). Onset is frequently 6–12 months after stroke. In two-thirds of children treatment was warranted. Studies with greater number of children will be useful in enabling us to predict the outcome of basal ganglia AIS, better out-patient surveillance and earlier treatment of dystonia to reduce morbidity 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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".