Down Syndrome

Author(s):  
Stephen R. Hooper ◽  
Julie Hammer

Down syndrome (DS) is the most common genetic cause of significant intellectual disability in humans. It was one of the first chromosomal disorders of humans to be associated with intellectual disabilities and, as such, has provided an evidence-based foundation from which work on many different disorders has been launched. John Langdon Down first described this syndrome in 1866 using the term mongoloid idiocy. The initial clinical description of DS comprised physical features (e.g., epicanthal folds, flat and broad face, enlarged tongue, microcephaly, short stature) and cognitive characteristics (e.g., intellectual impairment, fine and gross motor coordination problems, poor speech articulation). He also described a relatively positive personality in these individuals. Contemporary topographical descriptions are remarkably similar to Down’s description nearly 150 years ago, but a variety of other healthrelated issues have been uncovered since that time including congenital cardiac abnormalities, hypotonia, hearing and visual impairments, hypothyroidism, and precocious aging (Rasmussen, Whitehead, Collier, and Frias 2008). In accordance with the core tenets of this text, in this chapter we discuss epidemiology, etiology, and what is known about core pathophysiological mechanisms in DS; neurological abnormalities, including contemporary findings in neuroimaging; neurocognitive and socialbehavioral manifestations; and emergent evidencebased treatment efforts. The chapter concludes with a brief discussion of the phenotype-genotype linkages for DS, and a review of the priorities set by a national panel of experts in DS (Rasmussen et al. 2008). When compared to other congenital abnormalities, DS represents one of the most common disorders. Contemporary prevalence estimates indicate the occurrence of DS in approximately 9.0–11.8 (Shin et al. 2009) to 13.66 (Canfield et al. 2006) per 10,000 live births. The rate of infants born with DS also has a strong relationship with increasing maternal age. For example, a 20-year-old mother has a 1 in 1,923 chance of giving birth to an infant with Down syndrome, whereas the chance for a 49-year-old mother is 1 in 12 (Prescott 1988). The cause of this phenomenon, however, is not well understood (Lamb and Hassold 2004).

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 636
Author(s):  
Martina Fontana ◽  
Maria Carmen Usai ◽  
Sandra Pellizzoni ◽  
Maria Chiara Passolunghi

While previous research on inhibition in people with Down syndrome (DS) reported contradictory results, with no explicit theoretical model, on the other hand, a more homogeneous impaired profile on the delay of gratification skills emerged. The main goal of the present study was to investigate response inhibition, interference suppression, and delay of gratification in 51 individuals with DS matched for a measure of mental age (MA) with 71 typically developing (TD) children. Moreover, we cross-sectionally explored the strengths and weaknesses of these components in children and adolescents vs. adults with DS with the same MA. A battery of laboratory tasks tapping on inhibitory sub-components and delay of gratification was administrated. Results indicated that individuals with DS showed an overall worse performance compared to TD children on response inhibition and delay of gratification, while no differences emerged between the two samples on the interference suppression. Additionally, our results suggested that older individuals with DS outperformed the younger ones both in response inhibition and in the delay of gratification, whereas the interference suppression still remains impaired in adulthood. This study highlights the importance of evaluating inhibitory sub-components considering both MA and chronological age in order to promote more effective and evidence-based training for this population.


The Lancet ◽  
1978 ◽  
Vol 312 (8082) ◽  
pp. 213 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.A. Ferguson-Smith
Keyword(s):  

2008 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 252-257 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Leisti ◽  
L. Vahtola ◽  
S.-L. Linna ◽  
R. Herva ◽  
S.-L. Koskela ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bridget R. Roberts

A strong relationship exists between theory, research, and evidence-based practice; and these three entities are necessary to guide practice and contribute to the body of nursing knowledge. Doctor of nursing practice graduates can serve as leaders as they enter into their respective clinical practice areas. Through education of peers, along with translation and evaluation of current theoretical literature and empirical data, these advanced practice nurses can positively influence nursing practice and patient care.


2007 ◽  
Vol 115 (2) ◽  
pp. 211-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Fliers ◽  
N. Rommelse ◽  
S. H. H. M. Vermeulen ◽  
M. Altink ◽  
C. J. M. Buschgens ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 53 (10) ◽  
pp. 696-699 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Cairney ◽  
Louis A Schmidt ◽  
Scott Veldhuizen ◽  
Paul Kurdyak ◽  
John Hay ◽  
...  

Objective: To examine the prevalence of left-handedness in a sample of children screened for developmental coordination disorder (DCD). Method: Using the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency—Short Form (BOTMP-SF), 2297 children were screened with 128 scoring at or below the fifth percentile and identified as probable cases of DCD. Using the Movement-ABC (M-ABC) and the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test, 30 children (24 from the DCD group, and 6 who scored above the cut-off) were randomly selected for further assessment. Results: Among the students who had previously scored at or below the fifth percentile on the BOTMP-SF, 24 were evaluated. Among the 19 children who met diagnostic criteria for DCD (IQ > 70, M-ABC < 16th percentile), 37% ( n = 9) were left-handed. Among children who scored at or below the fifth percentile of the M-ABC, 46% were left-handed (6/13). Conclusion: The prevalence of left-handedness in children with DCD suggests a possible role for cerebral lateralization in motor coordination problems.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document