MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2947849877 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxz066.061

62 Nutritional risk in early childhood and later school concern outcomes

2019· article· en· W2947849877 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jessica Omand, Magdalena Janus, Jonathon L. Maguire, Patricia C. Parkin, Catherine S. Birken

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOddsEarly childhoodMedicineLogistic regressionCohortOdds ratioEthnic groupDemographyCohort studyMillennium Cohort Study (United States)Child developmentLongitudinal studyPediatricsDevelopmental psychologyGerontologyPsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nutrition in early childhood is important for healthy growth and development. Few studies have examined long-term developmental outcomes. To determine if nutritional risk in early childhood is associated with later school concern outcomes. This longitudinal cohort study including children enrolled in the TARGet Kids! research network in Toronto, Canada between 2008 and 2018. Nutritional risk was measured in early childhood using the NutriSTEPTM, a validated 17-item parent-completed questionnaire. The NutriSTEPTM total score ranges from 0–68, with eating behaviours and dietary intake sub-scores. High nutritional risk can be defined using a cut off score > 21. Parent reported school concerns were measured at 4–10 years using the question “has the school expressed any concern about your child: speech and language; learning; attention; behaviour; social relationships with other children; physical coordination; fine motor coordination; self help skill and independence; and no concern”. Multiple logistic regressions were used to examine the relationships between nutritional risk exposures and the school concern outcome (any concern or no concern), adjusting for child sex, age, ethnicity, maternal education, family income, family living arrangements, and a previous diagnosis of developmental delay. The study included 3650 children, 52% were male, 14% had high nutritional risk and 21% of parents reported school concern. Each one-unit increase in total NutriSTEPTM score was associated with an increased odds of school concern (adj OR: 1.02, 95% CI: 1.01 – 1.04) and high nutritional risk was associated with an increased odds of school concern (adj OR: 1.49, 95% CI: 1.12 – 1.96). The eating behaviours and dietary intake sub-scores were both significantly associated with an increased odds of school concern with the magnitude of association being stronger for eating behaviours (see table 1). Nutritional risk in early childhood was associated with later parent reported school concern, with the largest impact from high risk eating behaviours. Future research could assess this relationship using teacher reported measures of school readiness (i.e. Early Development Instrument). Clinical trials of nutritional interventions in early childhood could examine school developmental outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.424
Threshold uncertainty score0.843

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicChild Nutrition and Water Access→French-language works237,207→