MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044530216 · doi:10.1177/088307380101600904

Profile of Referrals for Early Childhood Developmental Delay to Ambulatory Subspecialty Clinics

2001· article· en· W2044530216 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 Child Neurology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubspecialtyReferralMedicineSpecialtyLanguage delayCohortPediatricsAmbulatoryMedical diagnosisSpeech delayCohort studyFamily medicineLanguage developmentPsychologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to determine the profile and pattern of referral to subspecialty clinics of young children with suspected developmental delay together with the factors prompting their referral. All children under 5 years of age referred to either developmental pediatrics or pediatric neurology clinics at a single tertiary hospital over an 18-month period were prospectively identified. Standardized demographic and referral information were collected at intake, final developmental delay subtype diagnosed was identified, and referring physicians were surveyed regarding factors prompting referral. A total of 224 children met study criteria. There was a marked male preponderance (166/224), especially among those with either cognitive or language delay. Two delay subtypes, global developmental delay and developmental language disorder, accounted for two thirds of the diagnoses made. For slightly more than one third of the children (75/224), the delay subtype diagnosed following specialty evaluation was different from that initially suspected by the referring physician. A mean delay of 15.5 months was observed for the cohort as a whole between initial parental concern and specialty assessment. For referring physicians, the major factor prompting referral was the severity of the observed delay. The most important aspects of the specialty evaluation according to referral sources were the identification of a possible etiology and confirmation of delay. A profile of referrals and the rationale thereof for a cohort of children with suspected developmental delay is presented that, although locale specific, has implications for service provision and training.

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)0.000
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 score0.192
Threshold uncertainty score0.527

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.264 · 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