Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33863380›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2021

Maternal drinking and smoking. Can it explain the exceptional academic performance of LBOTE children? A preliminary analysis.

Louisa Gibson, Melanie Porter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Louisa GibsonFaculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Department of Psychology, Macquarie University, Balaclava Road, North Ryde, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia. louisa.gibson@hdr.mq.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7235-8963
Melanie PorterFaculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Department of Psychology, Macquarie University, Balaclava Road, North Ryde, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAlthough children from language backgrounds other than English (LBOTE) may be disadvantaged in English-reliant exams, they outperform children from an English language background (ELB) on many Australian National Assessment Program-Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) assessments. Maternal alcohol and tobacco use during pregnancy and/or breastfeeding have been associated with poorer cognitive and academic performance. Using data from the Growing Up in Australia Study, this paper aimed to identify demographic, lifestyle, and prenatal and perinatal risk differences related to maternal tobacco and alcohol use between LBOTE and ELB groups, as a first step in trying to understand the academic performance differences.

resultsOnly data from breastfed babies was included in the current analyses. Although LBOTE children were disadvantaged in several demographic areas, their NAPLAN performance was the same or superior to ELB children across all Grade 3 and 5 NAPLAN assessments. The LBOTE group were, however, breastfed for longer, and their mothers smoked fewer cigarettes and drank less alcohol on fewer occasions throughout their pregnancy. The LBOTE mothers also had lower or less risky patterns of alcohol consumption while breastfeeding. The longer breastfeeding duration of LBOTE children combined with lower maternal use of alcohol and cigarettes during pregnancy and/or breastfeeding may partially contribute to their exceptional NAPLAN performance.

Indexed as

Academic PerformanceBreast FeedingAdultAlcohol DrinkingAustraliaChildChild DevelopmentFemaleHumansInfantMaternal AgePregnancySmokingTobacco SmokingAcademic achievementBreastfeedingDrinkingNon-English speaking backgroundPregnancySmoking

Identifiers

PMID33863380
PMCPMC8052672

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.