Cognitive and Emotional Well-Being of Preschool Children Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: The association between COVID-19 social disruption and young children's development is largely unknown. Objective: To examine associations of pandemic exposure with neurocognitive and socioemotional development at 24 and 54 months of age. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study evaluated associations between pandemic exposure vs nonexposure and developmental outcomes with covariate adjustment using data from the Ontario Birth Study collected between February 2018 and June 2022. Eligible participants were children aged 24 and 54 months. Data were analyzed from June to November 2022. Exposure: COVID-19 pandemic exposure defined as assessment after March 11, 2020. Main Outcome and Measures: Neurodevelopmental assessment using the ASQ-3 (Ages and Stages Questionnaire, Third Edition) and MCHAT-R (Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers, Revised) at 24 months of age, and neurocognitive and socioemotional assessment using the National Institutes of Health Toolbox at 54 months of age. Results: A total of 718 children at age 24 months (mean [SD] age, 25.6 [1.7] months; 342 female [47.6%]; 461 White [64.2%]) and 703 at age 54 months (mean [SD] age, 55.4 [2.6] months; 331 female [47.1%]; 487 White [69.3%]) were included. At 24 months of age, 460 participants (232 female [50.4%]) were assessed during the pandemic (March 17, 2020, to May 17, 2022) and 258 (110 female [42.6%]) were assessed prepandemic (April 17, 2018, to March 10, 2020). At 54 months of age, 286 participants (129 female [45.1%]) were assessed from March 14, 2020, to June 6, 2022, and 417 (202 female [48.4%]) were assessed from February 8, 2018, to March 10, 2020. At 24 months of age, pandemic-exposed children had reduced risk of problem-solving difficulties using cutoff scores (odds ratio [OR], 0.33; 95% CI, 0.18-0.62; P = .005) and higher problem-solving (B, 3.93; 95% CI, 2.48 to 5.38; P < .001) compared with nonexposed children. In contrast, pandemic-exposed children had greater risk for personal-social difficulties using cutoff scores (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.09-2.56; P = .02) and continuous scores (B, -1.70; 95% CI, -3.21 to -0.20; P = .02) compared with nonexposed children. At 54 months of age, pandemic-exposed children had higher receptive vocabulary (B, 3.16; 95% CI, 0.13 to 6.19; P = .04), visual memory (B, 5.95; 95% CI, 1.11 to 10.79; P = .02), and overall cognitive performance (B, 3.89; 95% CI, 0.73 to 7.04; P = .02) compared with nonexposed children, with no differences in socioemotional development. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found both positive and negative associations between pandemic exposure and preschool children's cognitive and emotional well-being within a relatively socioeconomically advantaged sample.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".