Oral and non‐oral sensorimotor interventions enhance oral feeding performance in preterm infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this study was to determine whether oral, tactile/kinaesthetic (T/K), or combined (oral+T/K) interventions enhance oral feeding performance and whether combined interventions have an additive/synergistic effect. METHOD: Seventy-five preterm infants (mean gestational age 29 wk; standard error of the mean [SEM] 0.3 wk; mean birthweight 1340.3g; SEM 52.5 g; 49 males and 26 females) were randomly assigned to one of three intervention groups or a control group. The oral group received sensorimotor input to the oral structures, the T/K group received sensorimotor input to the trunk and limbs, and the combined group received both. The outcomes were time from introduction of nipple feeding to independent oral feeding (d), proficiency (intake in the first 5 min, %), volume transfer (%), rate of transfer (mL/min), volume loss (%), and length of hospital stay (d). RESULTS: Infants in the three intervention groups achieved independent oral feeding 9-10 days earlier than those in the control group (p<0.001; effect size 1.9-2.1). Proficiency (p ≤ 0.002; effect size 0.7-1.4) at the time of one to two and three to five oral feedings per day, volume transfer (p ≤ 0.001; effect size 0.8-1.1) at one to two, three to five, and six to eight oral feedings per day, and overall rate of transfer (p ≤ 0.018; effect size 0.8-1.1) were greater, and overall volume losses were less (p ≤ 0.007; effect size 0.9-1.1), than in the control group (p ≤ 0.042). The combined group attained independent oral feeding at a significantly younger postmenstrual age than controls (p=0.020) and had clinically greater proficiency than the T/K group (p=0.020; effect size 0.7) and oral group (p=0.109; effect size 0.5). Length of hospital stay was not significantly different between groups (p=0.792; effect size 0.02-0.3). INTERPRETATION: Oral and T/K interventions accelerated the transition from introduction to independent oral feeding and enhanced oral feeding skills. T/K has beneficial effects beyond the specific targeted system. The combined sensorimotor intervention led to an additive/synergistic effect for proficiency, further benefiting this population.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".