MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170007788 · doi:10.1542/peds.2006-2462

Motor Profile of Children With Developmental Speech and Language Disorders

2007· article· en· W2170007788 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsCentre for Movement Disorders
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLanguage developmentAudiologySpeech disorderPsychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the motor profile of 125 children with developmental speech and language disorders and to test for differences, if any, in motor profile among subgroups of children with developmental speech and language disorders. METHODS: The participants were 125 children with developmental speech and language disorders aged 6 to 9 years from 2 special schools for children with communication problems in the northern Netherlands. They were tested with the Movement Assessment Battery for Children. The children were classified by the schools' speech and language therapists into 3 subgroups on the basis of language tests, oral motor tests, and clinical examinations: children with speech disorders (n = 14), language disorders (n = 46), or both (n = 65). RESULTS: Compared with the norms of the Movement Assessment Battery for Children, children with developmental speech and language disorders performed significantly less well. Results showed that 51% of the children with developmental speech and language disorders had borderline or definite motor problems. Children with language disorders had significantly lower scores (ie, better performance) on the ball-skills subtest and the total test than children with speech disorders and children with both speech and language disorders. Furthermore, children with language disorders had significantly better performance on the balance subtest than children with both speech and language disorders. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study support the idea that developmental speech and language disorders are frequently associated with motor problems and that the kind of developmental speech and language disorders affects motor performance differently. Speech and language disorders seem to have more impact on motor performance than only language disorders, and it seems that when speech production is affected, motor problems are more pronounced. The findings support the need to give early and more attention to the motor skills of children with developmental speech and language disorders in the educational and home setting, with special attention to children whose speech is affected.

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.

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 score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.233 · 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