MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401472164 · doi:10.1177/08295735241259061

Math Abilities Among Children with Neurodevelopmental Difficulties: Understanding Cognitive Factors and Evaluating a Pilot Intervention

2024· article· en· W4401472164 on OpenAlexafffund
Danielle Mattson, Kathryn Kryska, Jacqueline Pei, Claire D. Coles, Julie A. Kable, Molly Millians, Gail Andrew, Damien C. Cormier, Carmen Rasmussen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of School Psychology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCognitionWorking memoryPsychologyIntervention (counseling)NormativeDevelopmental psychologyShort-term memoryLearning disabilityExecutive functionsClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Math development in children relies on several underlying cognitive functions, including executive functions (EF), working memory (WM), and visual-motor abilities, such as visual-motor integration (VMI). Understanding how these cognitive factors contribute to children’s math performance is critical to supporting math learning and long-term math success. The present quasi-experimental waitlist control study ( N = 28) aimed to (a) examine the unique contributions of EF, WM, and VMI to math abilities among children ages 5–8 years old with neurodevelopmental difficulties; (b) determine whether a math intervention (the Mathematics Interactive Learning Experience; MILE) that supports these cognitive processes was effective when modified to be delivered to small groups in a school setting, and (c) examine whether any participant characteristics, such as age or IQ, were correlated with post-intervention math score changes. At baseline, participants’ math scores were significantly below the normative mean in all math content areas ( ps < .01). EF, WM, and VMI were highly correlated with math ability; however, verbal WM was the only unique predictor of math ability in regressions analysis. Compared to a waitlist control group, children in the immediate MILE intervention group achieved significantly greater math gains overall. When all children who ultimately completed the intervention were considered together, significant improvement was observed in more than half of math content areas. Furthermore, at the individual level, 85.7% of participants showed reliable change in at least one math content area. Implications for supporting math learning in children with neurodevelopmental difficulties are discussed.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of School PsychologySame topicCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skillsFrench-language works237,207