↓ Skip to main content

Association of Child Poverty, Brain Development, and Academic Achievement

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA Pediatrics, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
82 news outlets
blogs
19 blogs
policy
13 policy sources
twitter
466 X users
facebook
44 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
17 Google+ users
reddit
9 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
678 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1177 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Association of Child Poverty, Brain Development, and Academic Achievement
Published in
JAMA Pediatrics, September 2015
DOI 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2015.1475
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicole L. Hair, Jamie L. Hanson, Barbara L. Wolfe, Seth D. Pollak

Abstract

Children living in poverty generally perform poorly in school, with markedly lower standardized test scores and lower educational attainment. The longer children live in poverty, the greater their academic deficits. These patterns persist to adulthood, contributing to lifetime-reduced occupational attainment. To determine whether atypical patterns of structural brain development mediate the relationship between household poverty and impaired academic performance. Longitudinal cohort study analyzing 823 magnetic resonance imaging scans of 389 typically developing children and adolescents aged 4 to 22 years from the National Institutes of Health Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study of Normal Brain Development with complete sociodemographic and neuroimaging data. Data collection began in November 2001 and ended in August 2007. Participants were screened for a variety of factors suspected to adversely affect brain development, recruited at 6 data collection sites across the United States, assessed at baseline, and followed up at 24-month intervals for a total of 3 periods. Each study center used community-based sampling to reflect regional and overall US demographics of income, race, and ethnicity based on the US Department of Housing and Urban Development definitions of area income. One-quarter of sample households reported the total family income below 200% of the federal poverty level. Repeated observations were available for 301 participants. Household poverty measured by family income and adjusted for family size as a percentage of the federal poverty level. Children's scores on cognitive and academic achievement assessments and brain tissue, including gray matter of the total brain, frontal lobe, temporal lobe, and hippocampus. Poverty is tied to structural differences in several areas of the brain associated with school readiness skills, with the largest influence observed among children from the poorest households. Regional gray matter volumes of children below 1.5 times the federal poverty level were 3 to 4 percentage points below the developmental norm (P < .05). A larger gap of 8 to 10 percentage points was observed for children below the federal poverty level (P < .05). These developmental differences had consequences for children's academic achievement. On average, children from low-income households scored 4 to 7 points lower on standardized tests (P < .05). As much as 20% of the gap in test scores could be explained by maturational lags in the frontal and temporal lobes. The influence of poverty on children's learning and achievement is mediated by structural brain development. To avoid long-term costs of impaired academic functioning, households below 150% of the federal poverty level should be targeted for additional resources aimed at remediating early childhood environments.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 466 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,177 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 <1%
United Kingdom 4 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 1163 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 168 14%
Student > Master 158 13%
Student > Bachelor 136 12%
Researcher 127 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 95 8%
Other 211 18%
Unknown 282 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 255 22%
Social Sciences 142 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 135 11%
Neuroscience 86 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 54 5%
Other 162 14%
Unknown 343 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1176. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 April 2024.
All research outputs
#12,445
of 25,721,020 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Pediatrics
#60
of 6,751 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87
of 277,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Pediatrics
#1
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,721,020 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,751 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 79.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,541 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.