Prenatal alcohol exposure – a systematic review of the effects on child motor function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the available evidence on the effects of prenatal alcohol exposure on motor function in humans. DESIGN: Systematic review. POPULATION: Pregnant women and their offspring. METHODS: The search strategy included Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and Scopus. The authors read titles and abstracts, and the articles that met the predefined criteria for inclusion were obtained and the full text read. The articles were assessed for quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Motor function measured on standardized or validated tests. RESULTS: The search resulted in 311 titles and abstracts, of which 39 were found relevant for inclusion. The findings of this review suggest a negative effect when the maternal consumption exceeded a certain level. Of all studies reporting a maternal intake of more than four drinks/day, only one study showed no effect on motor function, and of all studies reporting intake levels of less than 10 drinks/week, only one study showed deficit on the children's motor function. CONCLUSIONS: While it appears consistent that high daily alcohol intake is associated with deficits in gross and fine motor function, and low weekly intake is not associated with such deficits, the issue of binge drinking is unsettled.
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 | 0.001 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; 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".