The Effect of Bilingual Exposure on Language and Cognitive Recovery in Children following Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pediatric stroke often affects higher-level cognition and linguistic processes. Certain linguistic and cognitive advantages have been confirmed in behavioural studies of typically developing bilingual children. This research evaluates the effects of bilingual exposure on linguistic/cognitive recovery in children post-stroke. In Study 1, an interaction effect between language group and stroke-onset group revealed that bilinguals 1-12 months at stroke onset had better expressive language compared to monolinguals, based on the Pediatric Stroke Outcome Measure administered at several points post-stroke. In Study 2, a monolingual-bilingual pair of children aged 78 at stroke onset were compared using language/cognitive assessments in a case study. Results taking relative change over time in account showed similarities to Study 1, with the bilingual case having a more consistent recovery of expressive language. Overall, no negative effect of bilingualism on development after stroke was found; rather there may be an expressive linguistic advantage post-stroke outcome for bilingual patients.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".