Measurement of educational attainment in school‐aged children born preterm
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The rigorously designed study by Johnson et al.1 sets out to assess the utility of the Teacher Academic Attainment Scales (TAAS) as an educational outcome measure in a study of children born preterm and term born controls at school-age. Several papers have been published by Johnson et al.2 on the results of the EPICure study, and have reported on neuropsychological outcomes and academic attainment of children born extremely preterm and the prevalence of their needs for special educational in middle childhood. This current paper proposes the TAAS as an adequate way to replace standardized measures of educational outcomes, which are lengthy and costly to administer. Specifically, these authors aim to show that a brief teacher-rating of academic attainment could be a cost- and time-efficient alternative to traditional standardized testing. Several important issues are brought forth by this paper. First, the importance of scholastic performance as an outcome for children born preterm cannot be overemphasized. Assessment of need for special education provides a functional marker for scholastic performance which complements the complexity of the detailed neuropsychological assessment. Both provide an important measurement of the risk for ongoing impairment in educational outcomes.2 Second, this study identifies the classroom teacher as an essential component in the assessment of academic risk and has provided evidence of acceptable test–retest reliability, and concurrent and predictive validity between teacher assessment and standardized tests to prove the point. This pragmatic focus on the classroom teacher as a source for quantifying educational attainment makes the inclusion of these data more feasible and thus more likely in future studies.1 Finally, it is important to bear in mind the different purposes for measurement in clinical practice and research; i.e. description and screening tools determine the frequency and presence/absence of a particular condition and evaluative tools are utilized for treatment planning and setting goals.3 While detailed neuropsychological assessments are indeed costly, their importance lies in educational planning and, hopefully, in measuring change with intervention. The advantage and utility of well validated measures such as the TAAS is that they allow us to measure more of the whole picture of attainment of high-risk populations, such as those born preterm, in large-scale studies.4 Future studies that include the TAAS as a measure of educational outcome over time will be important to better interpret the findings of this paper.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,013 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».