MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W158609239 · doi:10.1093/pch/19.5.241

Developmental milestones among Aboriginal children in Canada

2014· article· en· W158609239 on OpenAlexaffabout
Leanne Findlay, Dafna Kohen, Anton R. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsSunny Hill Health Centre for ChildrenStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDevelopmental MilestoneMilestoneGross motor skillDevelopmental psychologyIntervention (counseling)PsychologyChild developmentDemographyGerontologyMedicineMotor skillGeographySociologyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Windows of achievement provide age ranges for the attainment of early developmental skills. Group-specific research is warranted given that development may be influenced by social or cultural factors. OBJECTIVES: To examine developmental milestones for Inuit, Métis and off-reserve First Nation children in Canada, based on developmental domains collected from the 2006 Aboriginal Children's Survey. Sociodemographic and health predictors of risk for developmental delay were also examined. RESULTS: The ranges in which children achieve certain developmental milestones are presented. Gross motor and self-help skills were found to be achieved earlier (across the three Aboriginal groups), whereas language skills were achieved slightly later than in Canadian children in general. Furthermore, health factors (eg, low birth weight, chronic health conditions) were associated with late achievement of developmental outcomes even when sociodemographic characteristics were considered. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that the timing of milestone achievement may differ for Aboriginal children, highlighting the importance of establishing culturally specific norms and standards rather than relying on those derived from general populations. This information may be useful for practitioners and parents interested in identifying the age ranges for development, as well as age ranges indicating potential for developmental risk and opportunities for early intervention among Aboriginal children.

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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations14
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207