MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200055759 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050488

PediaTrac V.3.0 protocol: a prospective, longitudinal study of the development and validation of a web-based tool to measure and track infant and toddler development from birth through 18 months

2021· article· en· W4200055759 on OpenAlexaff
Renée Lajiness-O’Neill, Seth Warschausky, Alissa Huth‐Bocks, H. Gerry Taylor, Judith Brooks, Angela Lukomski, Trivellore E. Raghunathan, Patricia A. Berglund, Angela D. Staples, László A. Erdődi, Stephen Schilling

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsToddlerBayley Scales of Infant DevelopmentMedicinePredictive validityChild developmentDevelopmental psychologyDiscriminant validityConstruct validityEarly childhoodRepeated measures designLongitudinal studyPediatricsCognitionClinical psychologyPsychologyPsychometricsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The need for an efficient, low-cost, comprehensive measure to track infant/toddler development and treatment outcomes is critical, given the importance of early detection and monitoring. This manuscript describes the protocol for the development and testing of a novel measure, PediaTrac, that collects longitudinal, prospective, multidomain data from parents/caregivers to characterise infant/toddler developmental trajectories in term and preterm infants. PediaTrac, a web-based measure, has the potential to become the standard method for monitoring development and detecting risk in infancy and toddlerhood. METHODS AND ANALYSES: V.3.0, a survey tool that queries core domains of early development, including feeding/eating/elimination, sleep, sensorimotor, social/sensory information processing, social/communication/cognition and early relational health. Information also will be obtained about demographic, medical and environmental factors and embedded response bias indices are being developed as part of the measure. Using an approach that systematically measures infant/toddler developmental domains during a schedule that corresponds to well-child visits (newborn, 2, 4, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18 months), we will assess 360 caregiver/term infant dyads and 240 caregiver/preterm infant dyads (gestational age <37 weeks). Parameter estimates of our items and latent traits (eg, sensorimotor) will be estimated by theta using item response theory-graded response modelling. Participants also will complete legacy (ie, established) measures of development and caregiver health and functioning, used to provide evidence for construct (discriminant) validity. Predictive validity will be evaluated by examining relationships between the PediaTrac domains and the legacy measures in the total sample and in a subsample of 100 participants who will undergo a neurodevelopmental assessment at 24 months of age. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This investigation has single Institutional Review Board (IRB) multisite approval from the University of Michigan (IRB HUM00151584). The results will be presented at prominent conferences and published in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

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)0.001
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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.365
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

Citations15
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207