Internalizing behaviours in school‐age children born very preterm are predicted by neonatal pain and morphine exposure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Greater neonatal pain is associated with higher internalizing behaviours in very preterm infants at 18 months corrected age, but it is unknown whether this relationship persists to school age. Moreover, it is unclear whether morphine ameliorates or exacerbates the potential influence of neonatal pain/stress on internalizing behaviours. We examined whether neonatal pain-related stress is associated with internalizing behaviours at age 7 years in children born very preterm, and whether morphine affects this relationship. METHODS: One hundred one children born very preterm (≤32 weeks gestation) were seen at mean age 7.7 years. A parent completed the Parenting Stress Index and Child Behavior Checklist questionnaires. Neonatal pain-related stress (the number of skin-breaking procedures adjusted for clinical factors associated with prematurity) was examined in relation to internalizing behaviour, separately in subjects mechanically ventilated and exposed to both pain and morphine (n = 57) and those never mechanically ventilated, exposed to pain but not morphine (n = 44). RESULTS: In the non-ventilated group, higher skin-breaking procedures (p = 0.037) and parenting stress (p = 0.004) were related to greater internalizing behaviours. In the ventilated group, greater morphine exposure (p = 0.004) was associated with higher child internalizing scores. CONCLUSIONS: In very preterm children who undergo mechanical ventilation, judicious use of morphine is important, since morphine may mitigate the negative effects of neonatal pain on nociception but adversely affect internalizing behaviours at school age. Management of procedural pain needs to be addressed in very preterm infants in the neonatal intensive care unit, to prevent long-term effects on child behaviour.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".