MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949208239 · doi:10.1097/dbp.0000000000000677

Heterogeneous Trajectories of Delayed Communicative Development From 12 to 36 Months: Predictors and Consequences

2019· article· en· W2949208239 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Rochelle F. Hentges, Sheri Madigan, André Plamondon, Nicole Racine, Beverly Anne Collisson, Suzanne Tough, Susan A. Graham

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta InnovatesChildren's Hospital FoundationAlberta Children's Hospital FoundationMax Bell Foundation
KeywordsMedicineProspective cohort studyReferralChild developmentLongitudinal studyCohortLanguage developmentDemographyCohort studyDevelopmental psychologyPregnancyPediatricsPsychologyPsychiatryFamily medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to identify distinct trajectories of delayed communicative development from 12 to 36 months and examine differences in risk factors and developmental outcomes for each trajectory. METHODS: Participants were 2192 children drawn from a prospective longitudinal pregnancy cohort in a large Canadian city. Maternal pregnancy medical records were used to determine perinatal risk factors. The Ages and Stages Questionnaire Communication subscale was administered at 12, 24, and 36 months. At 36 months, mothers reported on the child's health, cognitive, and behavioral development. RESULTS: Using growth mixture modeling, we identified 4 trajectories of communicative development. Most children (81.1%) were characterized by high and stable scores from 12 to 36 months. The remaining children fell into a low-increasing class (13.0%), a moderate-stable class (4.5%), and a low-decreasing class (1.4%). At 36 months, the low-increasing class had caught up to the high-stable group. However, by 36 months, the low-decreasing class fell under the recommended "referral" cutoff, and the moderate-stable class fell under the "monitoring" cutoff criteria. Children with continued communication problems at 36 months were more likely to have a congenital anomaly and lower family income than late-talking children who had caught up. CONCLUSION: Repeated assessments of a brief screening tool were able to differentiate patterns of communicative development over time, each with unique risk factors and developmental outcomes. Results highlight the potential for risk factors and repeated screenings to help identify children most at risk for persistent communication delays and in need of early support services.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.257 · 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.

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
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Developmental & Behavioral PediatricsSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207