Cognitive and Academic Outcomes Following Childhood Cortical Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The majority of pediatric neuropsychological stroke research has focused on perinatal stroke outcomes given its relative frequency. Meanwhile, childhood-onset stroke is under-represented in the literature, resulting in limited knowledge about its neurocognitive sequelae. This retrospective study examined cognitive outcomes in children and youth (n = 27) with childhood arterial ischemic stroke (stroke occurring between 29 days and 18 years of life) isolated to the cortical region. Intellectual, academic, language, visual-perception, visual-motor integration, fine motor coordination, and executive function scores were examined relative to normative means. Results indicate that although these children are doing well in terms of general intellectual ability, they demonstrate lower scores on tasks of processing speed and fine motor coordination. Exploratory analysis also revealed that of the personal and neurologic factors examined, age at stroke was positively correlated with perceptual reasoning and fine motor control, age at assessment was negatively correlated with math calculation abilities, and maternal education was positively correlated with working memory and parent-reported behavioral regulation and impulse inhibition abilities. While neurologic variables were not predictive of cognitive neuropsychological outcomes, those with significant poorer performance had higher rates of medium/large, right-sided lesions with frontal lobe involvement. Our results highlight the overall resilience of the injured developing brain but also the vulnerability of specific cognitive skills within this unique 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".