Memory functioning in children born with low birth weight: A comparison with normal birth weight children diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Medical advances over the last two decades have lead to increased survival rates of children born with increasingly lower birth weights. Studies have revealed that the lower the birth weight of the child, the higher the possibility that he/she will develop some associated neurological and neuropsychological problems. Archival data for children used in this study were collected through a retrospective chart review at Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit, Michigan. The purpose of this study was to examine possible deficits in different aspects of memory, (visual, verbal, and delayed recall) in children born with LBW and to compare these deficits with children born with normal birth weight (NBW) who have been diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). A total of 86 children between the ages of 5 and 13 were administered the Test of Memory and Learning (TOMAL) as a measure of memory functioning. Other neuropsychological measures administered were the Beery test of Visual Motor Integration (VMI), the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT), the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST), the visual and auditory attention subtests of the NEPSY, and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, 3rd edition (WISC-III) or the Stanford Binet Test of Intelligence as a measure of global intellectual functioning. Results revealed that children with LBW demonstrate below average performance on measures of nonverbal (NM) and sequential memory. Below average performance was also measured on the VMI, PPVT, WCST and NEPSY attention measures. When compared to children with ADHD, the children in the LBW group demonstrated significantly poorer performance in visual attention, delayed recall, nonverbal, and sequential memory. In addition, only nonverbal memory scores were significantly and positively correlated with birth weight. However, variance in nonverbal memory scores was predicted primarily by IQ, PPVT, and NEPSY visual attention scores.Dept. of Psychology. Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis2002 .W45. Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 41-04, page: 1206. Adviser: B. Rourke. Thesis (M.A.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2002.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".