MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082823908 · doi:10.1177/2167702613509371

Auditory Processing in Growth-Restricted Fetuses and Newborns and Later Language Development

2013· article· en· W2082823908 on OpenAlexaff
Barbara S. Kisilevsky, Beverly Chambers, Kevin C. H. Parker, Gregory Davies

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Psychological Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsKingston General HospitalQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyLanguage developmentHabituationDevelopmental psychologyBATESLanguage acquisitionGestational ageCognitionLanguage delayAudiologyPregnancyMedicinePsychiatryNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Growth-restricted fetuses and newborns are at increased risk for language deficits, and language impairments have been associated with increased risk for cognitive, social, emotional, and behavioral clinical disorders. Auditory-information processing was examined longitudinally in 167 fetuses in Study 1, 96 of whom were reexamined as newborns in Study 2. In Study 3, language was assessed at 15 months of age for 75 infants from Study 1. Compared with participants who were appropriately grown for gestational age, growth-restricted fetuses showed less sustained response to their mother’s voice; growth-restricted newborns showed less recovery to a novel word after habituation and no preference for their mother’s voice. At 15 months of age, those infants who had been born growth restricted showed expressive-language deficits on Mullen Scales of Early Learning and MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventory subscales. Our results support the hypothesis that fetal growth restriction affects the development of auditory-system functioning and indicate that it may be possible to identify individual fetuses and newborns at risk for language deficits and to intervene early, when the foundation for language is being laid.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.363 · 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

Citations9
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Psychological ScienceSame topicLanguage Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207