Developmental health in the context of an early childhood program in Brazil: the “Primeira Infância Melhor” experience
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Design and evaluation of early child development (ECD) programs are poorly documented in low- or middle-income countries. The study aimed to identify family and child characteristics associated with developmental health outcomes among children aged from 4 to 6 years who participated in the "Primeira Infância Melhor" - PIM (Better Early Childhood), a home visiting program in Rio Grande do Sul State, Brazil. We also evaluated the impact of PIM on developmental vulnerability at school entry using a comparison group. Multistage sampling was first used to select cities, then families, in different regions of the state, resulting in a sample of eight cities and 571 children (364 PIM; 207 comparison). We used a sociodemographic questionnaire, completed by parents, and the Early Development Instrument (EDI), completed by teachers. Among PIM children, lower family income, time of exit from the program, city, and younger age were associated with higher risk of developmental vulnerability and/or with lower mean scores in EDI domains. Multivariate analysis controlling for covariates found no differences between the study groups in EDI outcomes even though the gaps in equity of the outcomes were smaller in the PIM group. These results are discussed in the context of challenges faced by home visiting programs in addressing complex social conditions of high-risk families and difficulties in finding an adequate comparison group in communities where an ECD program is universally accessible. We also note the importance of setting structured and longitudinal monitoring systems together with the implementation of ECD policies.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it