Feasibility of a parent-delivered attention and working memory intervention for early school-aged children born preterm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Preterm birth is a common neurodevelopmental condition that can have lasting impacts on cognition, including attention and working memory. Interventions that strengthen these skills in early childhood could support school readiness. Dino Island is a tablet-based intervention that combines process-specific practice of attention and working memory skills with a compensatory component that teaches metacognitive skills to scaffold learning. In this pilot study, we evaluated the feasibility of parent-delivered Dino Island in young children born preterm (N=10), alongside a control group who played educational games (N=12). Both groups were instructed to play 2-3 times per week for approximately 20 minutes over a 12-week period. Attention and working memory on untrained tasks were assessed before and after completing the intervention. Parents provided fidelity data through tracking sheets and participated in exit interviews to offer feedback and identify barriers and facilitators. We found that the Dino Island program was successfully delivered by parents with high fidelity. Attrition was higher in the Dino Island group, likely reflecting the challenges of delivering cognitive remediation in home settings. Comparison of attention and working memory scores on untrained tasks pre- and post-showed practice effects but no specific benefit of Dino Island. However, parent reports suggested behavioral improvements specific to the Dino Island group, noting far-transfer effects where children applied metacognitive strategies in other contexts. Overall, this work shows feasibility and tolerability of Dino Island in young children born preterm. Future research should examine its potential impact on school readiness and longer-term academic outcomes in this population.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".