Long-term brain-injury-specific effects following preschool mild TBI: A study of theory of mind.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: A previous study conducted by our group found theory of mind (ToM) differences in preschool children who sustained mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) compared with typically developing peers, 6 months postinjury. The goals of the current longitudinal study were to determine whether these findings are the result of a brain-injury-specific effect or rather a general-injury effect, to examine the long-term evolution of ToM skills following preschool mTBI, as well as to investigate the links between ToM abilities and general social functioning. METHOD: Seventy-two children who sustained mTBI between the ages of 18 and 60 months were evaluated 6 and 18 months postinjury on ToM tasks including desires and emotions reasoning and false belief understanding. They were compared with 58 participants who sustained an orthopedic injury (OI) and 83 typically developing children (TDC). RESULTS: The 3 groups did not differ on demographic and baseline characteristics. The mTBI group obtained poorer scores relative to both comparison groups on the desires and emotions reasoning task, both at 6 and 18 months injury. No correlations were found between injury characteristics and ToM performance. For the mTBI group, associations were found between ToM performance and global social competence. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest a brain-injury-specific effect that persists in the long-term following mTBI in preschool children. (PsycINFO Database Record
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".