Brain volumes, cognitive, and adaptive skills in school-age children with Down syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Down syndrome (DS) is the most common congenital neurodevelopmental disorder, present in about 1 in every 700 live births. Despite its prevalence, literature exploring the neurobiology underlying DS and how this neurobiology is related to behavior is limited. This study fills this gap by examining cortical volumes and behavioral correlates in school-age children with DS. Methods School-age children (mean = 9.7 years ± 1.1) underwent comprehensive assessments, including cognitive and adaptive assessments, as well as an MRI scan without the use of sedation. Children with DS (n = 35) were compared to available samples of typically developing (TD; n = 80) and ASD children (n = 29). ANOVAs were conducted to compare groups on cognitive and adaptive assessments. ANCOVAs (covarying for age, sex, and total cerebral volume; TCV) compared cortical brain volumes between groups. Correlations between behavioral metrics and cortical and cerebellar volumes (separately for gray (GM) and white matter (WM)) were conducted separately by group. Results As expected, children with DS had significantly lower cognitive skills compared to ASD and TD children. Daily Living adaptive skills were comparable between ASD children and children with DS, and both groups scored lower than TD children. Children with DS exhibited a smaller TCV compared to ASD and TD children. Additionally, when controlling for TCV, age, and sex, children with DS had significantly smaller total GM and tissue volumes. Cerebellum volumes were significantly correlated with Daily Living adaptive behaviors in the DS group only. Conclusions Despite children with DS exhibiting lower cognitive skills and smaller brain volume overall than children with ASD, their deficits in Socialization and Daily Living adaptive skills are comparable. Differences in lobar volumes (e.g., Right Frontal GM/WM, Left Frontal WM, and Left and Right Temporal WM) were observed above and beyond overall differences in total volume. The correlation between cerebellum volumes and Daily Living adaptive behaviors in the DS group provides a novel area to explore in future research.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".