Child Care Attendance and Educational and Economic Outcomes in Adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To test associations between onset of formal child care (in infancy or as a toddler), high school graduation, and employment earnings from ages 18 to 35 years. METHODS: A 30-year prospective cohort follow-up study, with linkage to government administrative databases (N =3020). Exposure included formal child care, if any, by accredited caregivers in centers or residential settings at ages 6 months and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, and 4 years. A propensity score analysis was conducted to control for social selection bias. RESULTS: Of 2905 participants with data on child care use, 59.4% of male participants and 78.5% of female participants completed high school by age 22 to 23. Mean income at last follow-up (n = 2860) was $47 000 (Canadian dollars) (SD = 37 700) and $32 500 (SD = 26 800), respectively. Using group-based trajectory modeling, we identified 3 groups: formal child care onset in infancy (∼6 months), formal child care onset as a toddler (after 2.5 years), and never exposed. After propensity score weighting, boys with child care started in infancy had greater odds of graduating than those never exposed (odds ratio [OR] 1.39; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.18–1.63; P < .001). Boys attending child care had reduced odds of low income as young adults (infant onset: OR 0.60 [95% CI: 0.46–0.84; P < .001]; toddler onset: OR 0.63 [95% CI: 0.45–0.82; P < .001]). Girls’ graduation rates and incomes revealed no significant association with child care attendance. CONCLUSIONS: For boys, formal child care was associated with higher high school completion rates and reduced risk of adult poverty. Benefits for boys may therefore extend beyond school readiness, academic performance, and parental workforce participation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".