Measurement Invariance Across Parent and Self-Ratings of Extremely Low Birth Weight Survivors and Normal Birth Weight Controls in Childhood and Adolescence on the Child Behavior Checklist and Youth Self-Report: Table I.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the measurement invariance of the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) and Youth Self-Report (YSR) DSM-oriented scales between extremely low birth weight (ELBW) and normal birth weight (NBW) youth. METHODS: The sample included 158 ELBW survivors and 145 matched, NBW controls at 8 and 12-16 years of age. RESULTS: Strict invariance was established at 8 years for parent-reported CBCL attention-deficit hyperactivity, conduct, and oppositional defiant scales, though invariance could not be established for affective problems at 8 or 12-16 years. Strict invariance was observed between 12-16-year-old ELBW and NBW groups on attention-deficit hyperactivity, anxiety, and oppositional defiant CBCL and YSR scales. Invariance could not be established for youth-reported conduct problems. CONCLUSIONS: While the majority of CBCL/YSR DSM-oriented subscales assess the same concepts in both ELBW and NBW children and adolescents across parent and youth reports, this may not be the case for affective and conduct problems.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".