The family environment predicts long-term academic achievement and classroom behavior following traumatic brain injury in early childhood.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study examined how the family environment predicts long-term academic and behavioral functioning in school following traumatic brain injury (TBI) in early childhood. METHOD: Using a concurrent cohort, prospective design, 15 children with severe TBI, 39 with moderate TBI, and 70 with orthopedic injury (OI) who were injured when they were 3-7 years of age were compared on tests of academic achievement and parent and teacher ratings of school performance and behavior on average 6.83 years postinjury. Soon after injury and at the longer term follow-up, families completed measures of parental psychological distress, family functioning, and quality of the home environment. Hierarchical linear regression analyses examined group differences in academic outcomes and their associations with measures of the early and later family environment. RESULTS: The severe TBI group, but not the moderate TBI group, performed worse than did the OI group on all achievement tests, parent ratings of academic performance, and teacher ratings of internalizing problems. Higher quality early and late home environments predicted stronger academic skills and better classroom behavior for children with both TBI and OI. The early family environment more consistently predicted academic achievement, whereas the later family environment more consistently predicted classroom functioning. The quality of the home environment predicted academic outcomes more strongly than did parental psychological distress or family functioning. CONCLUSION: TBI in early childhood has long-term consequences for academic achievement and school performance and behavior. Higher quality early and later home environments predict better school outcomes for both children with TBI and children with OI. (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 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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".