Language development in children with congenital heart disease aged 12–24 months
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This longitudinal study aims to describe the trajectory of language development in children with CHD aged 12-24 months assessed through an early monitoring and individualized intervention program. We also sought to determine whether early language performances, at 12 months of age, predict 24-month language abilities. We conducted developmental assessments of 49 children with CHD using the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Developmental, third edition (Bayley-III) at 12 and 24 months, and the MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventories (MBCDI) at 12, 18 and 24 months. Compared to normative populations, CHD patients showed significantly lower mean scores in both receptive and expressive language scales of the Bayley-III and the MBCDI at 12 months, whereas at 18 and 24 months only expressive language scores were reduced. No differences were found in the cognitive scale. Communicative gestures at 12 months were significantly predictive of language skills at 24 months of age. Our findings indicate specific vulnerability of language outcome, especially in expressive skills, rather than a global cognitive impairment in our patients with CHD. We recommend using communicative gestures as an early marker of language development to improve our ability to detect language delays in this population.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".