Mild Prematurity, Proximal Social Processes, and Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To elucidate the role of gestational age in determining the risk of poor developmental outcomes among children born late preterm (34-36 weeks) and early term (37-38 weeks) versus full term (39-41 weeks) by examining the contribution of gestational age to these outcomes in the context of proximal social processes. METHODS: This was an analysis of the Canadian National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth. Developmental outcomes were examined at 2 to 3 (N= 15099) and 4 to 5 years (N= 12302). The sample included singletons, delivered at 34 to 41 weeks, whose respondents were their biological mothers. Multivariable modified Poisson regression was used to directly estimate adjusted relative risks (aRRs). We assessed the role of parenting by using moderation analyses. RESULTS: In unadjusted analyses, children born late preterm appeared to have greater risk for developmental delay (relative risk = 1.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01 to 1.56) versus full term. In adjusted analyses, results were nonsignificant at 2 to 3 years (late preterm aRR = 1.13; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.42; early term aRR = 1.11; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.27) and 4 to 5 years (late preterm aRR = 1.06; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.43; early term aRR = 1.03; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.25). Parenting did not modify the effect of gestational age but was a strong predictor of poor developmental outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that, closer to full term, social factors (not gestational age) may be the most important influences on development.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".