MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057456500 · doi:10.1207/s15326942dn2102_2

Math and Numeracy in Young Adults With Spina Bifida and Hydrocephalus

2002· article· en· W2057456500 on OpenAlexaff
Maureen Dennis, Marcia A. Barnes

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Neuropsychology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsNumeracySpina bifidaPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyLiteracyCognitionYoung adultHydrocephalusPediatricsPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The developmental stability of poor math skill was studied in 31 young adults with spina bifida and hydrocephalus (SBH), a neurodevelopmental disorder involving malformations of the brain and spinal cord. Longitudinally, individuals with poor math problem solving as children grew into adults with poor problem solving and limited functional numeracy. As a group, young adults with SBH had poor computation accuracy, computation speed, problem solving, a ndfunctional numeracy. Computation accuracy was related to a supporting cognitive system (working memory for numbers), and functional numeracy was related to one medical history variable (number of lifetime shunt revisions). Adult functional numeracy, but not functional literacy, was predictive of higher levels of social, personal, and community independence.

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)0.005
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations70
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental NeuropsychologySame topicCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skillsFrench-language works237,207