Assessing prenatal attachment in a sample of Italian women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The term prenatal attachment refers to the affective investment that parents develop towards the unborn baby during the gestation period. Recent research supports the idea that the early relationship between the woman and the child she's bearing is related to the quality of postnatal mother–infant interaction and to the improvement of the woman's health behaviour in pregnancy. This study focuses on the process of the woman's bonding with her foetus and aims to assess the psychometric properties of the Italian translation of Prenatal Attachment Inventory (PAI). The PAI was translated into Italian and administered to a sample of 214 low‐risk pregnant women. As prenatal attachment is supposed to measure the mother's capability to emotionally invest in the foetus, the Toronto Alexithymia Scale was also administered to assess the pregnant women's alexithymia level. The results illustrate that the Italian version of the PAI maintains the main psychometric characteristics of the original version. Explorative factor analysis suggested a five‐factor structure. The association between low level prenatal attachment and high level alexithymia may be of interest in mother–infant wellbeing promotion programmes.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".