Investigating social functioning after early mild <scp>TBI</scp> : the quality of parent–child interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The young brain is particularly vulnerable to injury due to inherent physiological and developmental factors, and even mild forms of traumatic brain injury (mTBI) can sometimes result in cognitive and behavioural difficulties. Despite the high prevalence of paediatric mTBI, little is known of its impact on children's social functioning. Parent-child relationships represent the centre of young children's social environments and are therefore ideal contexts for studying the potential effects of mTBI on children's social functioning. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of parent-child interactions after mTBI using observational assessment methods and parental report. The sample included 130 children (18-60 months at recruitment) divided into three groups: children with uncomplicated mTBI (n = 47), children with orthopaedic injury (OI, n = 27), and non-injured children (NI, n = 56). The quality of parent-child interactions was assessed 6 months post-injury using the Mutually Responsive Orientation (MRO) scale, an observational measure which focuses on the dyadic nature of parent-child exchanges, and the Parental Stress Index questionnaire (Parent-Child Dysfunctional Interaction (PCDI) domain). Significant differences with medium effect sizes were found between the mTBI group and the NI group on the MRO, but not between the OI group and the other two groups. PCDI scores did not differ across groups, suggesting that observational measures may be more sensitive to changes in parent-child interactions after TBI. The current findings have implications for children's post-injury social development and highlight the importance of monitoring social outcomes even after minor head injuries.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".