Ecological and individual-level perspectives on children's at-home behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the prevalence, spatial distribution, and correlates of problem behaviour amongst the Grades K-4 cohort in the most highly urbanised portion of the Capital Regional District, British Columbia. Data for the study were collected during the period October through December, 1997. The first stage of data collection involved the distribution of a survey package, consisting of a socio-demographic and medical history questionnaire and the Walker Problem Behaviour Identification Checklist, to the parents of 3121 children in the 15 participating schools. A total of 571 useful responses were obtained, yielding a useful response rate of 18.3%. In the second stage of data collection, hair samples were obtained from 258 children. Hair elemental analysis of the samples allowed for the determination of individual children’s exposures to several toxic metals as well as systemic and/or dietary levels of various nutritive elements. Results of the behavioural assessment revealed that 23.8% of the participating children received a score in the ‘problem behaviour’ range for the Total Walker scale, a measure of overall behavioural functioning. Rates of problem behaviour for the subscales varied considerably: Acting-Out (33.5%); Withdrawal (5.3%); Distractibility (12.4%); Disturbed Peer Relations (31.2%); Immaturity (26.4%). Substantial variations in rates of problem behaviour were revealed at the census tract level, with each scale exhibiting a concentration of problem behaviour in the central portion of the study area. The most pronounced clustering of problem behaviour was apparent for the Total and Withdrawal scales, while the Disturbed Peer Relations scale results exhibited the most dispersed pattern. Ecological correlation analyses revealed that measures of socio-economic disadvantage, high mobility, and family dysfunction were positively correlated with census tract rates of problem behaviour, while measures of social and economic advantage appeared to have a ‘protective’ effect. The degree to which the urban ecology of the study area was related to prevalence rates was dependent upon the nature of the behaviour being considered, with behaviours related to withdrawal and immaturity showing the least association with social factors. Contextual analyses suggested that, in some cases, the quality of the urban environment had an independent association with problem behaviour, beyond the effects of individual social status. Amongst the medical history-related factors considered, having a food allergy was a characteristic significantly more prevalent amongst children with problem behaviour on the Total and Distractibility scales, while children born following a ‘prolonged labour’ were more likely to receive a score above the problem behaviour threshold for the Immaturity scale. Social status and family characteristics appear to be of particular significance as potential ‘risk’ and ‘protective’ factors. Children with problem behaviours were more frequently exposed to variables describing economic disadvantage, stressful life circumstances, and disruptive events; and were more likely to live in a single parent, rented, and/or subsidised home than other children. The factors considered were of least importance for behaviour characterised by ‘acting-out’ and ‘immaturity.’ While seemingly of less significance than the other factors considered, nutritive mineral imbalances and toxic metal exposures may have an important influence on children’s behaviour. Calcium status appears to be of some consequence, with significant positive associations observed between 'low’ exposure to this mineral and problem behaviour of several types. Behaviour characterised by distractibility ’ may be the most affected by mineral status, with significant associations observed between problem behaviour of this type and 'low ’ calcium, 'high’ manganese, and 'high' cadmium. The results obtained suggest that at least one factor from each level of analysis was of significance as a potential 'risk’ or protective’ factor for each behavioural problem considered. As a result, a more holistic, multidisciplinary approach to the study of childhood behavioural problems seems justified.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".