MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Growth of infant communication between 8 and 12 months: A population study

2006· article· en· W2042616296 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

VenueJournal of Paediatrics and Child Health · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsPolicyWise for Children & Families
FundersNational Health and Medical Research Council
KeywordsMedicinePediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To describe changes in infant prelinguistic communication skills between 8 and 12 months, and identify factors associated with those skills. DESIGN: Parent questionnaire data for a prospective population-based cohort of infants in metropolitan Melbourne, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: 1911 infants born November 2002-August 2003. OUTCOME: Infant communication (Communication and Symbolic Behaviour Scales (CSBS)) at 8 and 12 months. Potential risk factors: sex; prematurity; multiple birth; sociodemographic indicators; maternal mental health, vocabulary and education; non-English speaking background; and family history of speech-language difficulties. Linear regression models were fitted to total standardised CSBS scores at 8 and 12 months. RESULTS: Social communication, especially the use of gesture, developed rapidly from 8 to 12 months. Female sex, twin birth, and family history were strongly associated with CSBS scores. The combined model accounted for 5% and 6% of the total variation at 8 and 12 months, respectively. CSBS score at 8 months strongly predicted CSBS score at 12 months (coefficient = 0.56, partial R(2) = 37.0). CONCLUSIONS: There is a dramatic increase in communication skills between 8 and 12 months, particularly the development of gesture, which (as in previous studies) predates and predicts future language development. Risk factors explained little variation in early communication trajectories and therefore, based on our findings, this developmental course is more likely to be biologically predetermined. Rather than focusing on risk factors, we suggest that language promotion activities in otherwise healthy young infants should either be universal or, if targeted, be based on the level of communication skills displayed.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.286 · 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