MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Relative Association of Bio‐Medical and Socio‐Environmental Risk Factors with School‐Age Child Cognition in Indonesia

2016· article· en· W2970411010 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elizabeth L. Prado, Susy Katikana Sebayang, Mandri Apriatni, Nina Hidayati, Siti Robiah Adawiyah, Ayu Islamiyah, Sudirman Sudirman, Benyamin Harefa, Katie Alcock, Michael T. Ullman, Husni Muadz, Anuraj H. Shankar

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPublic Health and Nutrition
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionMedicinePregnancyChild developmentMicronutrientCognitive developmentAssociation (psychology)PediatricsMotor skillDevelopmental psychologyDemographyPsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Child cognitive, motor, and socio‐emotional development is affected by multiple bio‐medical and socio‐environmental factors. A better understanding of the influence and interplay of these factors is needed to inform the strategic design and integration of child development programs with existing reproductive, maternal, neonatal and child health (RMNCH) programs. We assessed the cognitive, motor, and socio‐emotional function of 2879 9–12‐year‐old children whose mothers had participated in the Supplementation with Multiple Micronutrients Intervention Trial (SUMMIT). In multiple regression models, we assessed the relative effect size of seven bio‐medical risk factors and five socio‐environmental risk factors on each of seven cognitive, motor, and socio‐emotional scores. Six factors were measured before birth, two at birth, and four at school‐age follow‐up. The socio‐environmental factors showed stronger and more consistent associations with school‐age cognitive, motor, and socio‐emotional scores, as compared to the bio‐medical factors. Pre‐term birth, born small for gestation age, maternal anemia, and low maternal mid‐upper arm circumference and height during pregnancy were not significantly associated with any score. Child anemia at follow‐up was significantly associated with fine motor dexterity only. Children whose mothers received multiple micronutrient supplements during pregnancy and postpartum scored higher in procedural memory only. Post‐natal growth in height was significantly associated with general intellectual ability and academic achievement. In contrast, each of the socio‐environmental factors was significantly associated with three to five of the seven scores. Children in low SES households scored significantly lower in general intellectual ability, declarative memory, executive function, academic achievement, and fine motor dexterity. Both maternal and paternal education were associated with general intellectual ability, executive function, and academic achievement, while maternal education was also associated with declarative memory and fine motor dexterity. Nurturing and stimulation from the environment (HOME Inventory score) was significantly associated with general intellectual ability, declarative memory, executive function, academic achievement, and fine motor dexterity. Maternal depression was strongly associated with child socio‐emotional development, and was the only significant predictor of this score. Children of depressed mothers also scored lower in declarative memory. In order to achieve thriving populations, coverage of existing RMNCH interventions to prevent these bio‐medical conditions needs to be improved. Even with improved coverage of existing interventions, additional interventions addressing socio‐environmental risk factors are also needed. Support or Funding Information Funded by Grand Challenges Canada Saving Brains

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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicPublic Health and NutritionFrench-language works237,207