Traumatic Brain Injury, Abuse, and Poor Sustained Attention in Youth and Young Adults Who Previously Experienced Foster Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Youth and young adults who previously experienced foster care are prone to negative life events, such as physical injuries, and adverse childhood experiences (ACE), such as abuse, neglect, and household dysfunction. The purpose of the present study was to identify the prevalence of traumatic brain injury (TBI), ACE, and poor sustained attention and the associations of these events in this group of vulnerable persons. Participants completed standardized questionnaires on the prevalence of self-reported TBI (TBI) and ACE and performed the Sustained Attention to Response Task (SART) test to measure sustained attention. Chi-squared and Kruskal-Wallis rank-sum tests were used to assess demographic differences and associations between TBI and ACE. Sustained attention was assessed using analysis of variance and linear modeling. Seventy-one participants—46 youth and young adults who previously experienced foster care (vulnerable group) and 25 age-matched healthy controls—completed the standardized questionnaires. Analyses indicated that vulnerable participants reported markedly higher rates of TBI and ACE than healthy controls. Vulnerable persons with TBI reported significantly higher Total ACE scores (p = 0.02), were more likely to have a history of family dysfunction (p = 0.02), and were more likely to have lived with a mentally ill guardian (p = 0.01) than vulnerable persons with no TBI. TBI was significantly associated with Total Errors (p = 0.001 and p = 0.02) and Omission Errors (p < 0.001 and p = 0.01) in all participants and in vulnerable participants, respectively, after adjusting for education level.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".