MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125970337 · doi:10.1111/cdev.13540

Child Language Difficulties and Internalizing and Externalizing Symptoms: A Meta-Analysis

2021· review· en· W3125970337 on OpenAlexafffund
Rochelle F. Hentges, Chloe Devereux, Susan A. Graham, Sheri Madigan

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Development · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta Children's Hospital Research InstituteAlberta Children's Hospital FoundationCanada Research ChairsUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsPsychologyExternalizationPsychopathologyDevelopmental psychologyAssociation (psychology)Meta-analysisLanguage developmentChild psychopathologyPoison controlClinical psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study conducted two meta-analyses to synthesize the association between children's language skills and two broad-band dimensions of psychopathology: internalizing and externalizing. Pooled estimates across 139 samples (externalizing k = 105; internalizing k = 90) and 147,305 participants (age range: 2-17 years old; mean % males: 53.75; mean % White participants: 55.59; mean % minority participants: 43.12) indicated small but significant associations between child language skills and externalizing problems (Hedges' g = .22) and between language skills and internalizing problems (Hedges' g = .23). The association between language difficulties and externalizing problems was stronger amongst males and in children with low versus high sociodemographic risk. Implications of the results for theory and practice 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.029
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations90
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild DevelopmentSame topicLanguage Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207