MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137456463 · doi:10.1542/peds.2010-1242

Economic Outcomes in Young Adulthood for Extremely Low Birth Weight Survivors

2010· article· en· W2137456463 on OpenAlexafffundabout
John H. Goddeeris, Saroj Saigal, Michael H. Boyle, Nigel Paneth, David L. Streiner, Barbara Stoskopf

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineCohortLow birth weightEducational attainmentLogistic regressionDemographyCohort studyEarningsBirth weightYoung adultPopulationPediatricsGerontologyPregnancyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The goal was to compare educational attainment and labor market outcomes in young adulthood (21-26 years of age) for a Canadian, population-based cohort of 149 extremely low birth weight (ELBW) (<1000 g) survivors and a normal birth weight (NBW) cohort of 133 young adults from the same geographic area who were matched to the ELBW cohort in childhood. METHODS: We estimated the effects of ELBW status, according to gender, on continuous outcomes through least-squares regression and those on binary outcomes through logistic regression. We controlled for family background and considered neurosensory impairment and IQ as mediating variables. RESULTS: Controlling for family background, ELBW male subjects were less likely to complete high school or to attend a university than were their NBW counterparts, and their educational attainment was reduced by >1 year. Among subjects who were working, weekly earnings were ∼27% lower. ELBW female effects on education were not significant, but ELBW female subjects were less likely than NBW subjects to be employed or in school and they also seemed to experience lower earnings. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggested that ELBW survivors are somewhat less productive as adults, on average, than are subjects born NBW and that effects are not confined to subjects with severe neurosensory impairments. In accord with other studies, however, we found that productivity deficits for most ELBW subjects were not large.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations21
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePEDIATRICSSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207