MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134084224 · doi:10.1186/1471-2458-10-183

Gauging knowledge of developmental milestones among Albertan adults: a cross-sectional survey

2010· article· en· W2134084224 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shivani Rikhy, Suzanne Tough, Barry Trute, Karen Benzies, Heather Kehler, David Johnston

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryPolicyWise for Children & Families
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiostatisticsMedicineCross-sectional studyPublic healthEpidemiologyEnvironmental healthDevelopmental MilestoneFamily medicineGerontologyPediatricsNursingPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Parental knowledge of child development has been associated with more effective parenting strategies and better child outcomes. However, little is known about what adults who interact with children under the age of 14 years know about child development. METHODS: Between September 2007 and March 2008, computer assisted telephone interviews were completed with 1443 randomly selected adults. Adults were eligible if they had interacted with a child less than 14 years of age in the past six months and lived in Alberta, Canada. RESULTS: Sixty three percent of respondents answered two (or more) out of four questions on physical development correctly. Fifteen percent of respondents answered two (or more) out of three questions on cognitive development correctly. Seven percent of respondents answered three (or more) out of five questions on social development correctly. Two percent of respondents answered three (or more) out of five questions on emotional development correctly. Parents and females were better able to identify physical developmental milestones compared to non-parents and males. 81% of adults correctly responded that a child's experience in the first year of life has an important impact on later school performance, 70% correctly responded that a child's ability to learn is not set from birth, 50% of adults correctly responded that children learn more from hearing someone speak than from television, and 45% recognized that parents' emotional closeness with a baby influences later achievement. Parents were most likely to use doctors/paediatricians, books, and nurses as resources. Among parents, there was no relationship between knowledge and parenting morale. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of adults were unable to correctly answer questions related to when children under six years of age typically achieve developmental milestones. Knowledge of physical development exceeded knowledge about cognitive, emotional and social development. Adults were aware of the importance of positive experiences in influencing children's development. Strategies to improve awareness of developmental milestones combined with information on how to support optimal development may improve child development outcomes. Given that parents seek information about child development from health care providers there is an opportunity to ensure that providers are well informed about child development.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations47
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public HealthSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207