Mediators Of Behavioral Problems in 7-Year-Old Children Born after 24 To 28 Weeks of Gestation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We tested the hypothesis that prematurity acts through its association with neuromotor and intellectual functioning to explain behavior problems at school age. Sixty-one extremely preterm (EP) very low birth weight (VLBW) children (< 29 wk and < 1,500 g) born in 1987-1990 and 44 normal birth weight children (NBW) (> 37 wk and > 2,500 g) were matched for age, sex, and socioeconomic status (SES). Mediator variables were evaluated at a hospital at 5 years and 9 months. Behaviors were evaluated at school at 7 years by peers, teachers, and parents. When compared with NBW children, EP/VLBW children had poorer IQ and neuromotor development. At school, EP/VLBW children were evaluated by peers as more sensitive/ isolated, and by teachers and parents as more inattentive and hyperactive than NBW. When mediators were introduced, the previously significant relation between prematurity and behavior problems disappeared. Hyperactive and inattentive behaviors were explained by a specific working memory factor for the latter, and by a general intellectual delay for the former, whereas sensitive/isolated behaviors were best explained by neuromotor delays. Inattentive behaviors were also related to family adversity. At school age, extreme prematurity had thus an indirect effect on behaviors via specific and nonspecific intellectual and neuromotor delays.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".