Children With Persistent Versus Transient Early Language Delay: Language, Academic, and Psychosocial Outcomes in Elementary School
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The objective of this study was to compare children with persistent versus transient preschool language delay on language, academic, and psychosocial outcomes in elementary school. Method Children with persistent language delay ( n = 30), transient language delay ( n = 29), and no language delay (controls; n = 163) were identified from a population-based sample of twins. They were compared on language skills, academic achievement, and psychosocial adjustment in kindergarten and Grades 1, 3, 4, and 6. Results Children with persistent language delay continued to show language difficulties throughout elementary school. Furthermore, they had academic difficulties, in numeracy, and psychosocial difficulties (attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder behaviors, externalizing behaviors, peer difficulties) from Grade 1 to Grade 6. Children with transient language delay did not differ from controls on language and academic performance. However, they showed more externalizing behaviors in kindergarten and peer difficulties in Grade 1 than controls. Conclusion Difficulties at school age are widespread and enduring in those with persistent early language delay but appear specific to psychosocial adjustment in those with transient language delay.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".