MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990601878 · doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2004/014)

Nonverbal Learning Disability

2004· review· en· W1990601878 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Speech-Language Pathology · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyNonverbal communicationStrengths and weaknessesLearning disabilityFocus (optics)LinguisticsIntervention (counseling)Cognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nonverbal learning disability (NLD) is a diagnostic category that is unfamiliar to most speech-language pathologists. This brief tutorial describes NLD's characteristics, a theoretical model proposed to explain its source, and areas of overlap between NLD and similar diagnostic categories. The communicative profile, made up of difficulties in pragmatic and semantic language in the presence of relatively preserved syntactic skill, is also discussed. Empirical evidence relevant to NLD is also evaluated. Many questions remain unresolved, but until systematic research provides definitive answers, speech-language pathologists are encouraged to rely on careful description of the individual child's communicative strengths and weaknesses to identify appropriate targets and to focus intervention on improving the child's ability to communicate effectively in everyday contexts.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.341 · 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