IMPORTÂNCIA DA UTILIZAÇÃO DE ESCALAS DE DESENVOLVIMENTO NO ACOMPANHAMENTO DE PREMATUROS DE ALTO RISCO
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The premature baby presents a real risk in developing its growth due to a process that was interrupted abruptly without the same morphology was prepared for the birth. The use of test development as a selective tool promotes early intervention for deviations from normal growth and development in children, besides helping in the diagnosis and prognosis. The aim of this study was to measure the motor performance in preterm infants by measurement of specific instruments. The study was conducted in a University Hospital of Parana, with ten baby boys and girls, with gestational age of 32.8 weeks who attended UNIT Intensive Care - ICU for 48 hours. It was noted that the evaluations performed by the Test of Infant Motor Performance - TIMP and the Alberta Infant Motor Scale, AIMS, are equivalent, identifying similarly to the driving condition of baby at risk. But the scale of TIMP was more sensitive since it indicated the need for monitoring of normal motor development, while at AIMS, the baby would be discharged early physiotherapy. The choice will depend on the scale of each population and objectives to be achieved by the professional. It is extremely important to monitor the child for professional physical therapy, to minimize the negative effects that prematurity can bring, because the earlier the diagnosis and intervention, the smaller the impact of these problems in a child's life. This study met our objective since it shows the importance of using specific tests to assess the DNPM in premature babies.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".