Traumatic Brain Injuries and Special Education Services in the Schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to replicate a study conducted by Hux, Marquardt, Skinner, and Bond (1999) in which the researchers explored the frequency of traumatic brain injuries (TBI) in the special education population as compared to the frequency of TBI among students in general education. Hux and colleagues (1999) found that roughly one-quarter of their sample received evaluations for special education services at some point, and that almost half their sample had sustained at least one TBI. Similarly, the current study explored the frequency of TBI in both general education and special education groups in a kindergarten through twelfth grade school. Results indicated that the sample in the current study reported a lower incidence rate of TBI than the general population as well as that in the 1999 study by Hux and colleagues. Additionally, only one student in the current sample (5% of TBI group) reported a history of TBI along with receiving special education services. Discrepancies between the current study and the Hux and colleagues (1999) study are explored, and possible reasons for the discrepancies are discussed.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".