Retrospective Evaluation of Number of Surgeries and Parent Ratings of Academic and Behavioral Functioning Among Children With Isolated Oral Clefts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate possible relationships between number of surgeries and parent ratings of academic functioning among children with isolated oral clefts. DESIGN: Multicenter, retrospective cohort study including structured interviews, questionnaires, and chart reviews. SETTING: Completion of questionnaires occurred during clinical visits at 6 different cleft centers across North America. PARTICIPANTS: Parents of 285 children with isolated clefts of the lip and/or palate, aged 8 to 10 years old, participated in structured interviews and completed questionnaires regarding the academic and behavioral functioning of their children. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Parent interview and medical chart review of number of surgeries to date and parent ratings on the Adaptive Behavior Assessment System, Third Edition-Functional Academics Scale (ABAS-FA) and Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) Total Competency Scale. RESULTS: Parent ratings of ABAS-FA were at or above normative expectations, while ratings across CBCL Competency Scales were lower than normative expectations. Socioeconomic status (SES), age, and race were consistent predictors of parent ratings (higher SES, older age, and Caucasian race were associated with better functioning). Number of surgeries did not add significantly to academic ratings but did significantly contribute to ratings of social and activity participation. Patients with more surgeries were rated with lower functioning in these domains. CONCLUSIONS: Findings do not support a connection between number of surgeries and later ratings of academic functioning but do support a connection to social and activity involvement. Recommendations for conducting direct studies of the connection between surgeries and academic functioning as well as clinical considerations for surgeries and impact on social and activity involvement are discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 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".