P.036 Stroke in people with Down Syndrome: a retrospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There are only few studies approaching the prevalence and cause of stroke in children and adults with Down Syndrome (DS). Methods: We did a retrospective study of our cohort of 4962 patients of Jerome Lejeune Institute since 2007. We collected age of stroke, clinical presentation, cause (TOAST classification), treatment and clinical course. Results: We identified 20 patients from 6 to 56 years old .In all cases, it was a stroke of ischemic origin.: 8 children with a prevalence of 0.33%. 4 had a cardio-embolic origin, 3 secondary to Moya-Moya syndrome and one of undetermined origin. 12 adults (21 to 52 years old) with a prevalence of 0.46%.The majority of the causes of these ischemic strokes are indeterminate (9 of 12), Conclusions: We found a low prevalence and an ischemic cause in all cases of stroke, which differs from the general population. For pediatric stroke, the causes are expected thromboembolic in a context of heart disease most often or secondary to a Moya-Moya syndrome. For adult strokes, the average age is younger than that in the general population and the cause is indeterminate in most cases. We must better explore our patients to identify the risk factors in DS 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".