A longitudinal study of the physical growth and health of postinstitutionalized Romanian adoptees
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present longitudinal study, the physical growth and health of 36 early-deprived postinstitutionalized Romanian orphans (ROs; 17 boys) adopted by Canadian families are documented. Data were collected for each child at three time points: at 11 months postadoption, at 4.5 years of age and at 10.5 years of age. Data from the RO children were compared with those from children in two matched comparison groups (Canadian-born [CB] nonadopted children and early-adopted [EA] Romanian children without institutional experience).Results indicated that there was considerable growth retardation in the RO children at times 1 and 2. Nonsignificant differences in height and weight among the RO, CB and EA groups were obtained at time 3, indicating significant growth catch-up. Precocious puberty, a documented feature of some postinstitutionalized children, was not observed in the present study population. At time 3, the RO children did not differ from the CB or EA children on indicators of puberty. The poor physical health of the RO children at time 1 was no longer apparent at time 3. According to parent reports, the RO children were equally as healthy as the CB and EA children.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".