The Developmental Expressions of Behavioural Dysregulation in a 25-Month old Infant Presenting with Sleep Problems: The Case of Emily.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Emily was 25 months old when she was referred by her pediatrician because of her severe sleep problems. Her parents reported that she had never been a good sleeper but during the preceding nine months she would wake up every 1–2 hours and then scream for between 45 and 60 minutes without either parent being able to calm her. As her bedtime was between nine and ten PM and she would be up by six AM, this made for short nights and insufficient sleep for Emily overall. Once or twice weekly she would “collapse” around six to seven PM and sleep until about midnight but then demand to be entertained for the rest of the night. At daycare, which she had entered at age 13 months, she sleeps for one hour during the two hour nap at noon and lies quietly in her crib for the other hour without ever crying. Emily is the only child of her parents. However, her father has a seven year old son from a previous marriage who lives with his mother but visits Emily’s family every second weekend. Both the boy and Emily are very close and miss each other when they are apart. Both parents of Emily have jobs at the airport, mother working from two AM to 11 AM four days per week and father from midnight to 12 noon three shifts per week. When their respective shifts overlap, the maternal grandparents sleep over at their house. The developmental history of Emily is unusual. While mother’s early part of her pregnancy was described as normal, mother was involved in a car accident while she was abroad on business during the fourth month of gestation and hospitalized for 48 hours because of concerns about her pregnancy. As there were no serious injuries, she returned home. However, during the subsequent prenatal visits it was noted that the baby had stopped growing and also seemed to have stopped swallowing amniotic fluid, leading to a significant size and weight gain of mother. This condition persisted for two months, after which the infant began to grow again and mother’s weight gain slowed down as well. Because of this unusual episode, mother was induced at 37 weeks. However, problems occurred during this process, necessitating an emergency Caesarian section, causing extreme stress for mother. However the Apgar ratings of Emily were eight and nine respectively and her birth weight was five pounds, leading to a discharge home after five days. While Emily took a minimal amount of fluid in the hospital, she stopped taking any fluids after her discharge home, leading to a re-admission to a university associated children’s hospital where she was diagnosed as “failure to thrive” and the Feeding Disorder Team was called in to support the needed medical care. Once she was rehydrated she was transferred to the “Day Hospital”, a newly developed program within the hospital that allowed children to sleep at home but spend their days at the hospital to continue needed rehabilitation from professionals such as the Feeding Disorder Team. After two weeks, Emily was discharged home from the Day Hospital but followed closely by the Feeding Disorder team up to the age of eight months. She weighed eight kg at 12 and 11 kg at 24 months. During the second year of life, Emily was found to have a “sun allergy”, requiring her to avoid any direct exposure to the sun. She also was diagnosed to have a gluten intolerance. However, she passed her motor milestones at the expected ages and became an active youngster who is learning to talk and can be very charming and interested in others. She slept in her parent’s bed until her mother returned to work after six months but found it very hard to fall asleep in her new crib. Both parents dealt with that by cradling her in their arms until she was fully asleep and then placing her into her crib. They stopped this practice after her first birthday, initiating the above mentioned disorganized sleep pattern of Emily.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».