Canadian Youth Born Large or Small for Gestational Age and Externalizing and Internalizing Problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine if youth born large for gestational age (LGA; birth weight above the 95th percentile) or small for gestational age (SGA; less than the fifth percentile) are at an increased risk of developing symptoms of externalizing and internalizing problems. METHOD: Data on members of the Ontario Child Health Study aged 4 to 16 years were used to examine associations between LGA, SGA, and psychopathology. This sample consisted of 2923 youth about whom parent, teacher, and self-reported levels of internalizing and externalizing symptoms were available, and whose caregivers retrospectively reported birth weight and gestational age (GA). Psychopathology was assessed using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-oriented scales derived from the Child Behavior Checklist. RESULTS: Multilevel linear regression analyses revealed that after adjustment for parental psychopathology, socioeconomic disadvantage, sex, age, maternal age, birth order, and child health and school performance, youth born LGA had higher scores on the self-reported externalizing scale (1.39, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.78), but not internalizing scale, compared with youth born at an appropriate weight for GA (10th to 90th percentile). Parent and teacher ratings generally supported these findings in direction but did not reach statistical significance. Youth and parents reported increased levels of externalizing and internalizing symptoms in youth born SGA, but these were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Youth born above the 95th percentile for GA manifest increased levels of externalizing symptoms. Given increasing rates of macrosomic births, further study is warranted to replicate and determine the clinical significance of these findings, the contribution of the antecedents of LGA to this risk and the extent to which this association may be causal.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".