Cognitive Correlates of Japanese Language (Hiragana) Reading Abilities among School-Aged very Low Birth Weight Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have examined that the reading abilities of Very Low Birth Weight (VLBW) children are poorer than those of Normal Birth Weight (NBW) children. However, little is known about the cognitive functions that have been used to explain the reading problems in VLBW children. This study investigated that the effects of attention function on reading abilities in VLBW children. 23 VLBW children (mean age 9.1 years old) and 23 NBW children (mean age 9.2 years old) completed a reading test (containing word reading and non-word reading tasks), attention tasks, a phonological task and a naming task. The group differences were significant for the non-word reading task and attention tasks. Moreover, there were significant correlations between scores on the reading test and those on attention tasks. Multiple stepwise regression analysis suggested the reading scores were influenced by attention. These results of the present study suggest that attentional dyslexia is a characteristic of reading among VLBW children.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".