ArticleChild psychiatry and human development2021
The Impact of Contextual, Maternal and Prenatal Factors on Receptive Language in a Chilean Longitudinal Birth Cohort.
Article in Child psychiatry and human development, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cohort Profile: The Early Childhood Longitudinal Survey (ELPI), Chile.International journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Study of a set of reading precursors among Chilean children with Down syndrome.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A secondary analysis was conducted on longitudinal data collected from ELPI, a representative Chilean survey to model Chilean infant's receptive language using contextual, maternal and prenatal factors. The sample for the current study comprised children aged between 36 and 48 months (n = 3921). The sample was re-assessed when children were aged 60-72 months (n = 3100). Linear regression analyses were conducted. At the first time point, all the predictors included were significant (living area, health system provision, maternal intelligence and education, adolescent pregnancy, maternal medical appointments during pregnancy, and presence of a significant other at childbirth), except for smoking during pregnancy. The model explained 13% of the variance. However, when timepoint one receptive language scores were included in the analyses for when children were aged 60-72 months, only two variables remained as significant predictors: previous receptive language scores and maternal education, explaining 21% of the variance. Findings and implications are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.