MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047158685 · doi:10.1002/pits.21600

Peer victimization and depression in children with and without motor coordination difficulties

2012· article· en· W2047158685 on OpenAlexaff
Wenonah Campbell, Cheryl Missiuna, Tracy Vaillancourt

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology in the Schools · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeer victimizationPsychologyDepression (economics)Clinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPopulationMental healthInjury preventionPoison controlPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Developmental coordination disorder (DCD) is a chronic disability that impacts children's performance of everyday motor‐based activities and is associated with the development of secondary social and mental health problems. The purpose of this study was to investigate peer victimization and depression in children who were and were not at risk for DCD. Selected from a population‐based sample, 159 at‐risk fifth graders were matched for age and gender to 159 controls. Children completed measures of depression and frequency of peer victimization. Results showed that children at risk for DCD reported more symptoms of depression and more frequent verbal and relational victimization than their peers. Being at risk for DCD and being bullied more frequently, especially relationally, significantly predicted increased depression symptoms. Findings highlight the importance of school psychologists remaining aware that children with DCD are at increased risk of experiencing bullying and depression. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.293
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations114
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology in the SchoolsSame topicChildren's Physical and Motor DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207