Early identification: are speech/language‐impaired toddlers at increased risk for Developmental Coordination Disorder?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD) is a movement skill disorder which impacts upon a child's ability to perform age-appropriate self-care and academic tasks. DCD is commonly comorbid with speech/language learning disabilities. AIM: The present study was conducted to determine whether children who had been identified with speech/language delays as toddlers demonstrated characteristics of DCD and/or speech/language problems at kindergarten age. RESULTS: Speech/language and motor assessments who were followed up at 63-80 months of age. Of the 40 children, 18 showed evidence of significant motor impairment and two-thirds of these met diagnostic criteria for DCD at follow-up. Twelve children were identified as having persistent speech/language problems and, of these, nine presented with significant motor co-ordination difficulties. Parental report of gross motor and fine motor problems at follow-up correlated highly with actual motor impairment scores. CONCLUSIONS: Young children who are in early intervention programmes for speech/language delays may have significant co-ordination difficulties that will become more evident at kindergarten age when motor deficits begin to impact self-care and academic tasks. Clinical implications for early recognition of motor issues by speech/language pathologists and the potential use of parental reporting tools are addressed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".