Pragmatic Language Comprehension After Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to examine the literature pertaining to pragmatic language comprehension in pediatric traumatic brain injury (TBI), in order to summarize the current evidence and to identify areas for further research. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE Ovid and PsycINFO Ovid using search terms to identify all articles that examined pragmatic language comprehension in children and adolescents with TBI published until November 2017. RESULTS: A total of 13 articles met our inclusion criteria. The studies included examined a number of pragmatic domains including knowledge-based and pragmatic inferences, detection and judgment of ambiguous sentences, comprehension of humor, understanding of figurative language (eg, metaphors and idioms), and comprehension of irony and deceptive praise. CONCLUSION: The research suggests that children and adolescents with TBI, as compared with healthy or orthopedically injured controls, display deficits in comprehension of pragmatic language. Children with severe TBI demonstrate more widespread deficits in pragmatic comprehension abilities, whereas children with mild TBI show relatively intact pragmatic comprehension. Limitations and gaps identified in the literature warrant further research in this area.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".