Pubertal stage, sex and behaviour in neurodevelopmental disorders versus typical development: a cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between pubertal stage, sex and behavioural profile across and within neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) compared with typically developing (TD) youth. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study from the Province of Ontario Neurodevelopmental Disorders network, including children/youth with various NDDs and TD controls. Caregivers completed the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). Participants were grouped into three puberty stages: prepuberty (Tanner stage 1), early puberty (Tanner stages 2-3) and late puberty (Tanner stages 4-5). The association between pubertal stage and CBCL scores was assessed controlling for sex and diagnosis. RESULTS: The analysis included 1043 participants (male=733; 70.3%). A three-way interaction between pubertal status, sex and diagnosis was not significant for internalising or externalising behaviour. Diagnosis was significantly associated with CBCL scores for both internalising (p<0.0001) and externalising (p<0.0001) behaviours, with lower scores for TD children than for NDD groups. Late pubertal females showed higher levels of internalising behaviour compared with prepubertal females (p=0.001); males showed no differences. Early pubertal males showed lower levels of externalising behaviour compared with prepubertal males (p=0.01); early pubertal females trended towards higher levels compared with prepubertal females (p=0.051). CONCLUSIONS: Internalising/externalising patterns of behaviours across pubertal stages did not differ based on diagnosis. Pubertal females are at higher risk for internalising behaviours.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".