MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094967312 · doi:10.1002/icd.468

Maternal sensitivity and behaviour problems in young children with developmental delay

2006· article· en· W2094967312 on OpenAlexaff
Alison Niccols, Maurice A. Feldman

Bibliographic record

VenueInfant and Child Development · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityBrock UniversityMcMaster Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaternal sensitivityPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyTypically developingChild Behavior ChecklistChild developmentAutism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Children with developmental delay are at increased risk for behaviour problems, but little is known about risk and resilience factors. Previous research has established links between maternal sensitivity and behaviour problems in typically developing children, but no studies have examined maternal sensitivity in the development of behaviour problems in children with developmental delay. In this study, we coded videotaped interactions of 30 2‐year‐olds with developmental delay and their mothers using the maternal behaviour Q‐sort and a child behaviour coding system. Mothers completed the child behaviour checklist when their children were 2 and 3 years old. Results revealed significant inverse relations between maternal sensitivity and concurrent and later externalizing problems, and significant positive relations between maternal sensitivity and concurrent observed appropriate behaviour (compliance and social engagement). This study informs developmental theory and identifies an important maternal variable that may reduce the risk of behaviour problems in children with developmental delay. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.006
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations22
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInfant and Child DevelopmentSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207