33
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Family-based training program improves brain function, cognition, and behavior in lower socioeconomic status preschoolers.

      Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
      methods, Models, Educational, Regression Analysis, Analysis of Variance, Humans, Electroencephalography, Parent-Child Relations, Cognition, Child, Preschool, Socioeconomic Factors, Oregon, Teaching, Behavior, physiology, Child Development, Program Evaluation, Attention

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Using information from research on the neuroplasticity of selective attention and on the central role of successful parenting in child development, we developed and rigorously assessed a family-based training program designed to improve brain systems for selective attention in preschool children. One hundred forty-one lower socioeconomic status preschoolers enrolled in a Head Start program were randomly assigned to the training program, Head Start alone, or an active control group. Electrophysiological measures of children's brain functions supporting selective attention, standardized measures of cognition, and parent-reported child behaviors all favored children in the treatment program relative to both control groups. Positive changes were also observed in the parents themselves. Effect sizes ranged from one-quarter to half of a standard deviation. These results lend impetus to the further development and broader implementation of evidence-based education programs that target at-risk families.

          Related collections

          Most cited references33

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Do multiple outcome measures require p-value adjustment?

          Background Readers may question the interpretation of findings in clinical trials when multiple outcome measures are used without adjustment of the p-value. This question arises because of the increased risk of Type I errors (findings of false "significance") when multiple simultaneous hypotheses are tested at set p-values. The primary aim of this study was to estimate the need to make appropriate p-value adjustments in clinical trials to compensate for a possible increased risk in committing Type I errors when multiple outcome measures are used. Discussion The classicists believe that the chance of finding at least one test statistically significant due to chance and incorrectly declaring a difference increases as the number of comparisons increases. The rationalists have the following objections to that theory: 1) P-value adjustments are calculated based on how many tests are to be considered, and that number has been defined arbitrarily and variably; 2) P-value adjustments reduce the chance of making type I errors, but they increase the chance of making type II errors or needing to increase the sample size. Summary Readers should balance a study's statistical significance with the magnitude of effect, the quality of the study and with findings from other studies. Researchers facing multiple outcome measures might want to either select a primary outcome measure or use a global assessment measure, rather than adjusting the p-value.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Socioeconomic status and the developing brain.

            Childhood socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with cognitive achievement throughout life. How does SES relate to brain development, and what are the mechanisms by which SES might exert its influence? We review studies in which behavioral, electrophysiological and neuroimaging methods have been used to characterize SES disparities in neurocognitive function. These studies indicate that SES is an important predictor of neurocognitive performance, particularly of language and executive function, and that SES differences are found in neural processing even when performance levels are equal. Implications for basic cognitive neuroscience and for understanding and ameliorating the problems related to childhood poverty are discussed.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Neurocognitive correlates of socioeconomic status in kindergarten children.

              Socioeconomic status (SES) is strongly associated with cognitive ability and achievement during childhood and beyond. Little is known about the developmental relationships between SES and specific brain systems or their associated cognitive functions. In this study we assessed neurocognitive functioning of kindergarteners from different socioeconomic backgrounds, using tasks drawn from the cognitive neuroscience literature in order to determine how childhood SES predicts the normal variance in performance across different neurocognitive systems. Five neurocognitive systems were examined: the occipitotemporal/visual cognition system, the parietal/spatial cognition system, the medial temporal/memory system, the left perisylvian/language system, and the prefrontal/executive system. SES was disproportionately associated with the last two, with low SES children performing worse than middle SES children on most measures of these systems. Relations among language, executive function, SES and specific aspects of early childhood experience were explored, revealing intercorrelations and a seemingly predominant role of individual differences in language ability involved in SES associations with executive function.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Comments

                Comment on this article