Bed-wetting and Its Association With Developmental Milestones in Early Childhood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between bed-wetting and various developmental milestones in a large and representative sample of young children. DESIGN: A randomized 3-level stratified survey design. SETTING: Data were collected by questionnaires, and interviews were scheduled at home with the mother. PARTICIPANTS: A representative sample of children born from 1997 to 1998 in Quebec. A complete set of data on bed-wetting was obtained for 1666 children at the ages of 29, 41, and 53 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Percentage of children who bed-wet and developmental factors associated with bed-wetting. RESULTS: Approximately 10% of the children were bed-wetting at the age of 53 months. Bed-wetting cessation occurred for most children studied between the ages of 29 and 41 months. Motor skills were achieved by fewer boys who bed-wet compared with boys who did not (had sat up without support for 10 minutes at 5 months, P = .05; and had started crawling at 5 months, P<.01). More girls who bed-wet were prematurely born and had hyperactivity and inattention (P<.01 for all) compared with those who did not. Language milestones were achieved by fewer children who bed-wet compared with those who did not (boys: P = .04; girls: P = .02). No between-group difference was found for physical growth and sleep variables. CONCLUSIONS: These findings show an association between bed-wetting and developmental milestones in early childhood. This study supports that bed-wetting could be indicative of a possible delay in the development of the central nervous system and could act as a noticeable indicator for parents and pediatricians.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".