MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209055754 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxab061.091

111 The Prevalence of Asthma in Canadian Kindergarten Children and its Association with their Developmental Health: A Population-Level Cross-Sectional Study

2021· article· en· W3209055754 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michelle Schneeweiss, Caroline Reid‐Westoby, George Hu, Molly Pottruff, Magdalena Janus

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHuman Health and Disease
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsthmaMedicinePopulationEpidemiologyBonferroni correctionCross-sectional studyDescriptive statisticsAssociation (psychology)PediatricsDemographyEnvironmental healthPsychologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Primary Subject area Epidemiology Background Asthma, the most common chronic illness affecting Canadian youth, can profoundly and adversely impact a child’s quality of life. Previous studies have shown a diagnosis of asthma can influence a child’s physical and socio-emotional functioning. Current data on asthma prevalence rates among Canadian children is scarce, and it is still unclear how this diagnosis impacts their development at school entry. Objectives The goals of the current study were to 1) examine the prevalence of teacher-reported asthma in Canadian kindergarten children, and 2) investigate the association between asthma and children’s concurrent developmental health. Design/Methods A cross sectional, population-level study of kindergarten children diagnosed with asthma as reported on the Early Development Instrument (EDI), was carried out in Canada from 2010-2015. Children’s developmental health in kindergarten was measured with the EDI. This 103-item questionnaire is completed by teachers for their students aged 4-6 years and covers demographic information, as well as five different domains of development. Descriptive statistics were examined for children with and without asthma. The level of statistical significance was adjusted using a Bonferroni correction to account for multiple hypothesis testing. The chi-square and one-way ANOVA statistics, as well as effect sizes (Cramer’s V, and eta squared) were reported for all descriptive analyses. Results 958 children (0.002% of the final analytical sample) were identified as having a teacher-reported diagnosis of asthma. Compared to their peers, children with asthma were significantly more likely to: be male (68.2% vs 51.2%); have a special needs designation (19.0% vs 3.6%); have a functional impairment (53.5% vs 15.9%); be identified by their teachers as needing further developmental assessment (32.3% vs. 13.1%); and miss, on average, 3 more days of school than their peers (9.44 vs. 6.71). They were also more likely to fall below a vulnerability threshold on one or more of the developmental domains (55.9% vs. 28.8%, Figure 1). Conclusion It is likely that the EDI captures only severe cases of asthma, as parents are more likely to disclose their child’s illness to teachers if it may influence their ability to function in a classroom. As such, children with asthma, especially those with severe forms, may require additional support. A partnership in which physicians provide preventative care, and teachers provide academic and classroom assistance, may help to ensure the optimal development of children with asthma, and close gaps between them and their peers.

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)0.002
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 score0.251
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicHuman Health and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207