Language Problems Among Abused and Neglected Children
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research data show that exposure to abuse and neglect has detrimental effects on a child's language development. In this meta-analysis, we analyze studies (k = 23), to compare the language skills (receptive language, expressive language, pragmatics) of children who have experienced abuse and/or neglect with the language skills of children who have not experienced abuse and/or neglect and to examine whether age or type of maltreatment moderate the relationship between maltreatment and language skills. Results confirm that the language skills of children who have experienced abuse and/or neglect are delayed when compared to children who have not experienced abuse and/or neglect. Compared to older children, young children seem particularly vulnerable to abuse and neglect. No significant differences were demonstrated concerning the type of maltreatment suffered by the child. These findings support the necessity of early detection of language problems in abused and neglected children as well as early intervention in order to implement interventions that will positively stimulate their 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 it