Age-Related Incidence of Publicly Reported Shaken Baby Syndrome Cases: Is Crying a Trigger for Shaking?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: : This study aims to determine whether the age-specific incidences (1) of publicly reported cases of shaken baby syndrome (SBS) and (2) of publicly reported cases of SBS with crying as the stimulus have similar properties to the previously reported normal crying curve. METHODS: : The study reports cases of SBS by age of the child at the time of the inflicted trauma from the data set of the National Center on Shaken Baby Syndrome using cases entered between January 1, 2003 and August 31, 2004. RESULTS: : There were 591 cases of infants up to 1.5 years of age who had been reported to have been shaken or shaken and physically abused. Of these, crying was reported as the stimulus in 166 cases. In both samples, the curves of age-specific incidence started at 2-3 weeks, reached a clear peak at about 9-12 weeks of age, and declined to lower more stable levels by about 29-32 weeks of age, similar to the normal crying curve. These curves have similar onsets and shapes and a slightly later peak compared to the normal crying curve. CONCLUSIONS: : The findings provide convergent indirect evidence that crying, especially in the first 4 months of age, is an important stimulus for SBS.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".