Weight Faltering in Infancy and IQ Levels at 8 Years in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to investigate the association between failure to thrive (defined as weight faltering in the first 9 months of life) and IQ levels 8 years later. METHODS: Weight gain (conditional on initial weight) from birth to 8 weeks, 8 weeks to 9 months, and birth to 9 months was measured on term infants from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. Cases of weight faltering were defined as those infants with a conditional weight gain below the 5th centile who were compared with the rest of the cohort as the control group. At the age of 8 years, 5771 infants born at term with no major congenital abnormalities had IQ measured by using the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Third Revision. RESULTS: Mean (SD) IQ scores were 104.7 (16.3) (total), 107.6 (16.5) (verbal), and 100.2 (16.9) (performance). Children whose weight faltered from birth to 9 months had a total IQ that was significantly lower by an average of -2.71 points at 8 years, equivalent to 0.17 SD. Weight gain from birth to 8 weeks had a positive linear association with child IQ at 8 years. This remained significant in a multivariate regression despite controlling for correlates of both infant growth and child IQ; 1 SD of weight gain was associated with a difference of 0.84 points in the total IQ score. In contrast to early weight faltering, weight gain from 8 weeks to 9 months was not related to IQ at 8 years. CONCLUSIONS: Failure to thrive in infancy was associated with persisting deficits in IQ at 8 years; the critical period for growth faltering was birth to 8 weeks. The relationship between infant growth from birth to 8 weeks and later intellectual development was approximately linear over the whole range of weight velocities.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".