ArticleBMC public health2022
Spatial statistical machine learning models to assess the relationship between development vulnerabilities and educational factors in children in Queensland, Australia.
Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of 8 weeks of rhythmic physical activity on gross motor movements in 4-5-year-olds: A randomized controlled trial.Journal of exercise science and fitness · 2024Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe health and development of children during their first year of full time school is known to impact their social, emotional, and academic capabilities throughout and beyond early education. Physical health, motor development, social and emotional well-being, learning styles, language and communication, cognitive skills, and general knowledge are all considered to be important aspects of a child's health and development. It is important for many organisations and governmental agencies to continually improve their understanding of the factors which determine or influence development vulnerabilities among children. This article studies the relationships between development vulnerabilities and educational factors among children in Queensland, Australia.
methodsSpatial statistical machine learning models are reviewed and compared in the context of a study of geographic variation in the association between development vulnerabilities and attendance at preschool among children in Queensland, Australia. A new spatial random forest (SRF) model is suggested that can explain more of the spatial variation in data than other approaches.
resultsIn the case study, spatial models were shown to provide a better fit compared to models that ignored the spatial variation in the data. The SRF model was shown to be the only model which can explain all of the spatial variation in each of the development vulnerabilities considered in the case study. The spatial analysis revealed that the attendance at preschool factor has a strong influence on the physical health domain vulnerability and emotional maturity vulnerability among children in their first year of school.
conclusionThis study confirmed that it is important to take into account the spatial nature of data when fitting statistical machine learning models. A new spatial random forest model was introduced and was shown to explain more of the spatial variation and provide a better model fit in the case study of development vulnerabilities among children in Queensland. At small-area population level, increased attendance at preschool was strongly associated with reduced physical and emotional development vulnerabilities among children in their first year of school.
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.