MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2736303211 · doi:10.22374/1710-6222.24.2.5

Emotional Understanding in School-Aged Children with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders: A Promising Target for Intervention

2017· article· en· W2736303211 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christie L. M. Petrenko, Mary E. Pandolfino, Julie Perkins Quamma, Heather Carmichael Olson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical Pharmacology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and AlcoholismCenters for Disease Control and Prevention
KeywordsNormativeIntervention (counseling)PsychopathologyPsychologyClinical psychologyFetal alcoholDevelopmental psychologyMental healthFetal alcohol syndromeMedicinePsychiatryAlcohol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Children with fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD) are at high risk for secondary conditions, including mental health difficulties. Data on both children with typical development and other clinical conditions suggest that limited emotional understanding (EU) raises risk for psychopathology, but little is known about EU in FASD. OBJECTIVES: To determine if EU is a reasonable treatment target for children with FASD. METHODS: 56 children (6-13 years) with FASD completed the Kusche Affective Interview-Revised, a verbal interview measure of EU. RESULTS: Children showed striking delays in EU (2-5 years delay) relative to published normative data, despite mean IQ (IQ=94.56) within normal limits. Individual variability was considerable even after accounting for age and verbal IQ. CONCLUSIONS: Despite variability in individual differences, treatments targeting EU may benefit children with FASD as components within a comprehensive, tailored intervention focused on child self-regulation and caregiver behavior management.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations10
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical PharmacologySame topicPrenatal Substance Exposure EffectsFrench-language works237,207