MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2558030285 · doi:10.1016/j.ssmph.2016.11.006

Neighbourhood socioeconomic status indices and early childhood development

2016· article· en· W2558030285 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Simon Webb, Magdalena Janus, Eric Duku, Rob Raos, Marni Brownell, Barry Forer, Martin Guhn, Nazeem Muhajarine

Bibliographic record

VenueSSM - Population Health · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatchewan HealthLearning PartnershipUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of ManitobaMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusNeighbourhood (mathematics)Index (typography)Child developmentEarly childhoodDemographyPsychologyPopulationDevelopmental psychologySociologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The developmental health of young children is highly influenced by the socioeconomic conditions in which they are raised. How to accurately measure these conditions is a point of debate in the current literature on child development, health, and social determinants. We have evaluated four existing indices of socioeconomic status (SES) to determine the most relevant for the analysis of early childhood development (ECD) in Canada. Following a literature review of published SES indices which used 2006 Canadian Census data, four indices were chosen based on their relevance to ECD and the number of citations in subsequent articles. These were: the Canadian Deprivation Index, the Socioeconomic Factor Index, the Canadian Marginalization Index and an index created by the Early Childhood Mapping Project in Alberta, Canada. The indices were replicated using SES data for 2038 customized geographic neighbourhoods encompassing 99.9% of the Canadian population, and the relationship of the indices to ECD was investigated by linking to aggregated data from the Early Development Instrument (EDI), a teacher-completed questionnaire used to assess kindergarten children's physical, social, emotional, and cognitive development, and communication skills. The derived SES indices were compared based on four criteria: the input variables used, the index structure, the interpretability of the index and the variance they explained (R2) in the different EDI outcome measures. In terms of variance explained, material components of the SES indices (e.g., income, education) consistently showed the strongest association with children's language and cognitive development. The patterns of association for the non-material SES components and the other developmental domains of the EDI were more complex. We discuss the findings in regard to current developments in the field, and the need for refining empirical and theoretical approaches to examine associations between different facets of SES contextual factors and different aspects of ECD outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.612
Threshold uncertainty score0.781

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations81
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSM - Population HealthSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207