Impact of an early educational protocol on the oral language of children born preterm exhibiting phonological fragility: a multicenter randomized clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We conducted a six-center, prospective, randomized, open-label trial to assess whether an early standardized educational protocol provided from 42 to 48 months of age improved the progression of oral language and phonological development in children born preterm. A total of 552 children with phonological fragility were included in this study. The children were randomized to receive the educational protocol (guided arm, n = 87) or not (non-guided arm, n = 78). In the guided arm, the oral language development used a short “say and do” type educational protocol designed to maintain visual attention and train the developmental phonology/lexicon/morphosyntax structural links. In contrast, a conservative approach was used in the non-guided arm. A total of 70 guided and 73 non-guided children completed the study. After 6 months, the educated children showed a non-significant increase in their phonology score (p = 0.37), while the variations in the scores of the expressive lexicon (secondary endpoints) were significantly improved (p = 0.0008). We conclude that the short, standardized stimulation of the sensorimotor aspects of language in children born very preterm increased the expressive lexicon. This protocol improved the language of the premature children, especially those with minimal motor skills, with more significant improvement in the phonological scores. Clinical trial registration clinicaltrials.gov , identifier NCT01426659
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".