MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3091684629 · doi:10.1542/peds.2020-0557

Kindergarten Readiness in Children Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing Who Received Early Intervention

2020· article· en· W3091684629 on OpenAlexaff
Jareen Meinzen‐Derr, Susan Wiley, Wendy Grove, Mekibib Altaye, Marcus Gaffney, Ashley Satterfield‐Nash, Alonzo T. Folger, Georgina Peacock, Coleen Boyle

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHearing Impairment and Communication
Canadian institutionsCentre for Disability Prevention and Rehabilitation
FundersCenters for Disease Control and PreventionNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineAudiologyIntervention (counseling)PediatricsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Children who are deaf or hard of hearing (D/HH) have improved language outcomes when enrolled in early intervention (EI) before the age of 6 months. Little is understood about the long-term impact of EI on outcomes of kindergarten readiness (K-readiness). The study objective was to evaluate the impact of EI before the age of 6 months (early) versus after 6 months (later) on K-readiness in children who are D/HH. METHODS: In this study, we leveraged data from the Ohio Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Data Linkage Project, which linked records of 1746 infants identified with permanent hearing loss born from 2008 to 2014 across 3 Ohio state agencies; 417 had kindergarten records. The Kindergarten Readiness Assessment was used to identify children as ready for kindergarten; 385 had Kindergarten Readiness Assessment scores available. Multiple logistic regression was used to investigate the relationship between K-readiness and early EI entry while controlling for confounders (eg, hearing loss severity and disability status). RESULTS: = .005). Children who entered early had similar levels of K-readiness as all Ohio students (39.9%). After controlling for confounders, children who entered EI early were more likely to be ready for kindergarten compared with children who entered later (odds ratio: 2.02; 95% confidence interval 1.18-3.45). CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the sustained effects of early EI services on early educational outcomes among children who are D/HH. EI entry before the age of 6 months may establish healthy trajectories of early childhood development, reducing the risk for later academic struggles.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.318
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 teacher head, 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

Citations45
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePEDIATRICSSame topicHearing Impairment and CommunicationFrench-language works237,207