MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168222042 · doi:10.1136/jech.2007.072157

Duration of lack of money for basic needs and growth delay in the Quebec Longitudinal Study of Child Development birth cohort

2008· article· en· W2168222042 on OpenAlexafffundabout
N Z Ehounoux, Marı́a Victoria Zunzunegui, L. Séguin, B. Nikiéma, Lise Gauvin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Epidemiology & Community Health · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsHealth CanadaUniversité de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCenters for Disease Control and Prevention
KeywordsMedicineLogistic regressionDemographyCohortConfoundingOddsCohort studyLongitudinal studyPopulationOdds ratioPediatricsEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between duration of lack of money for basic needs and growth delay in a birth cohort. METHODOLOGY: Mothers of children (n = 1929) from the Quebec Longitudinal Study of Child Development (QLSCD) participating when the children were ages 2(1/2) and 4 years were interviewed at home and data were extracted from birth records. Children's height at 4 years old was transformed into an age- and sex-adjusted z-score. A z-score under the 10th percentile of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention population growth curve was equated with growth delay. Lack of money for basic needs (paying for rent, electricity and/or heating, clothing, medications or other needs) when the children were ages 2(1/2) and 4 years was reported by the mother. RESULTS: Only 2.5% of children experienced two episodes of lack of money for basic needs. Logistic regression analyses showed that, after adjusting for confounding variables, the probability of growth delay at 4 years among children whose families experienced two episodes of lack of money was higher than for their peers who had not lacked money (OR 3.43; 95% CI 1.54 to 7.66). Experiencing lack of money only at 2(1/2) years showed higher but not significant odds of growth delay at 4 years (OR 1.51; 95% CI 0.84 to 2.72), whereas the likelihood of growth delay was similar for children who experienced lack of money only at 4 years and for their counterparts who never lacked money (OR 0.74; 95% CI 0.26 to 2.11). CONCLUSION: In an industrialised country toddlers whose families experienced persistent lack of money for basic needs are more likely to have growth delay even after controlling for neonatal conditions and their mothers' characteristics.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations14
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Epidemiology & Community HealthSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207