Prevalence and recurrence of pica behaviors in early childhood within the <scp>ALSPAC</scp> birth cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The present study examined prevalence and correlates of pica behaviors during childhood using data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) study. METHOD: Data on 10,109 caregivers from the ALSPAC study who reported pica behavior at 36, 54, 65, 77, and 115 months on their child were included. Autism was obtained through clinical and education records, while DD was derived from the Denver Developmental Screening Test. RESULTS: A total of 312 parents (3.08%) reported pica behaviors in their child. Of these, 19.55% reported pica at least at two waves (n = 61). Pica was most common at 36 months (N = 226; 2.29%) and decreased as children aged. A significant association was found between pica and autism at all five waves (p < .001). There was a significant relationship between pica and DD, with individuals with DD more likely to experience pica than those without DD at 36 (p = .01), and 54 (p < .001), 65 (p = .04), 77 (p < .001), and 115 months (p = .006). Exploratory analyses examined pica behaviors with broader eating difficulties and child body mass index. DISCUSSION: This study enhances understanding of childhood pica behaviors, addressing a significant gap in knowledge. Pica occurrence in the general population is poorly understood due to few epidemiological studies. Findings from the present study indicate pica is an uncommon behavior in childhood; however, children with DD or autism may benefit from pica screening and diagnosis between ages 36 and 115 months. Children who exhibit undereating, overeating, and food fussiness may also engage in pica behaviors.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".