Early Identification: Are Toddlers with Speech/Language Impairments at Increased Risk for Developmental Coordination Disorder?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children with Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD) have difficulty performing everyday motor tasks such as catching a ball, printing letters or their names, or playing on the playground with other children. Their motor skill level is below that of a typically developing child even though they have average intellectual ability and no other diagnosable neurological disorder (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). These children take longer to do tasks and experience many frustrations as they attempt ordinary activities such as dressing and feeding themselves. About 5-6 % of school aged children are affected by DCD (APA, 2000). What is speech/language impairment? Some children with speech/language impairment show delays in their ability to communicate, which are not due to any sensory, intellectual or neurological disorder. Approximately 7-10 % of preschool children in Canada have a specific speech and language disorder (Beitchman, Nair, Clegg, & Patel, 1986). Why did we do this study? Recent studies have documented that many school aged children with speech/language disorders also have coordination difficulties (Hill, 2001). Early identification of speech/language problems has been improved in Ontario with the advent of governmental policies supporting preschool initiatives. The observable speech/language problems of children are now being better identified when the children are still young.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".