Influence of seasonality in the motor development of healthy infants, born at term on the town of Santa Maria – RS
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The appropriate motor development involves a number of factors linked to the environment in which the child lives. From the assumption of that, the issue in this study bases on a possible interference of seasonal variation that the infant population of Santa Maria’s town is exposed during the year, and its influence in motor development on the first year of life. Aim: To investigate the influence of seasonality on the motor development of infants born full-term and healthy, at 7 and 10 months old and risk factors associated. Methods: The study came from an umbrella-project that was approved by the Ethics in Research Committee (CEP/UFSM) under the number 1487549. The study included term infants born in target months, which had experienced motor development milestones for the 2nd and 3rd quarters during summer or winter. The data collection was made on medical files, interviewing the parents and application of Alberta Infant Motor Scale, which was applied by an examiner who was experienced and blind to the aims of the study, for further calculation of score. This result allowed the classification of children in the risk for motor delay group (score ≤ P25) and no risk for motor delay group (score > P25). Results: 174 children were evaluated, 97 (55.75%) at 7 months and 77 (44.25%) at 10 months. The assessed groups, after summer and after winter, presented themselves as homogeneous in sample characterization. There were no statistically significant difference regarding global motor development outcomes, although they have experienced very different thermal periods (24.75 ± 2.58° C in the summer and 13.96 4.18 ±° C in the winter; p = 0.000). The time of the crawling acquisition of the crawl was statistically significantly higher in the post-winter group (p=0,004) at 10 months. When classified by the risk of motor delay, it was observed at seven the prevalence of pregnancy planning (p = 0,015), longer time of exclusive breastfeeding (p = 0,004) and the total time of breastfeeding (p = 0.012), in the no risk group, giving advantage to this group seven months both in prevalence and multivariate regression model, in which it highlighted an advantage to those who were breastfed at any time. At ten months the risk group had a lower gestational age (p = 0,040), older mothers (p = 0,020), a higher number of children per woman (p = 0,002), higher prevalence of socio-economic benefit (p = 0,002) and children spend most of the time they are awake in limited locations (p = 0,000) and the variables inherent to the number of children, receiving socio-economic benefit and to the place where the infant spend most of their time, remained after multivariate regression. Conclusion: In the present study, the cold weather did not showed itself as a decisive factor for motor development. However, considering the multifactorial of this change, the cold can represent a limiting adjunct when associated with other causes for infants who experience the milestone acquisitions season of the year.
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 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| 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 ».