MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387439129 · doi:10.1080/09297049.2023.2264535

A follow up investigation of placental pathology, responsive parenting, and preschool children’s executive functioning and language development

2023· article· en· W4387439129 on OpenAlexafffund
Sahar Borairi, Begüm Özdemir, Jennifer M. Jenkins, Prakesh S. Shah, John‏ Kingdom, Patricia A. Ganea

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Neuropsychology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersJ.P. Bickell Foundation
KeywordsPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyLanguage developmentExecutive functionsClinical psychologyCognitionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite documented effects linking underlying placental diseases and neurological impairments in children, little is known about the long-term effects of placental pathology on children's neurocognitive outcomes. In addition, maternal responsivity, known to positively influence early postnatal cognitive development, may act to protect children from putative adverse effects of placental pathology. The current study is a follow up of medically healthy, term born, preschool age children, born with placental pathology. A sample of 118 children (45 comparison children with normal placental findings, 73 born with placental pathology) were followed when children were 3-4 years old. In comparison to children born to mothers with normal placentas, placental pathology was associated with poorer performance in the executive function involving cognitive flexibility, but not inhibitory control or receptive language. Maternal responsivity was observed to be marginally protective on the impact of placental pathology risk on cognitive flexibility, but this was not seen for either inhibitory control or receptive language.

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)0.000
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 score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.906

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.252 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild NeuropsychologySame topicLanguage Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207