MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1551728687 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0129339

Predictors of Childhood Anxiety: A Population-Based Cohort Study

2015· article· en· W1551728687 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Dawn Kingston, Maureen Heaman, Marni Brownell, Okechukwu Ekuma

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsManitoba HealthUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAnxietyPsychosocialMedicinePopulationEarly childhoodCohort studyDistressCohortPediatricsPsychiatryClinical psychologyPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Few studies have explored predictors of early childhood anxiety. OBJECTIVE: To determine the prenatal, postnatal, and early life predictors of childhood anxiety by age 5. METHODS: Population-based, provincial administrative data (N = 19,316) from Manitoba, Canada were used to determine the association between demographic, obstetrical, psychosocial, medical, behavioral, and infant factors on childhood anxiety. RESULTS: Risk factors for childhood anxiety by age 5 included maternal psychological distress from birth to 12 months and 13 months to 5 years post-delivery and an infant 5-minute Apgar score of ≤7. Factors associated with decreased risk included maternal age < 20 years, multiparity, and preterm birth. CONCLUSION: Identifying predictors of childhood anxiety is a key step to early detection and prevention. Maternal psychological distress is an early, modifiable risk factor. Future research should aim to disentangle early life influences on childhood anxiety occurring in the prenatal, postnatal, and early childhood periods.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.224
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum→French-language works237,207→