Parental Caregiving and Developmental Outcomes of Infants of Mothers With HIV
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: All infants exposed to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prenatally, even those who do not become infected, are at risk for developmental problems because of poverty, prenatal substance abuse, and maternal illness. OBJECTIVES: The purpose was to describe the development of infants of mothers with HIV and to determine, using hierarchical linear models, the longitudinal effects of child characteristics, parental caregiver characteristics, family characteristics, and parenting quality on development. METHODS: Eighty-one infants born to women with HIV and their primary parental caregivers were followed-up until 18 to 24 months of age; 53 infants were always cared for by their biologic mothers, 16 were always cared for by kin or foster parents, and 12 had primary caregiver changes. Predictor variables and developmental outcomes were obtained at enrollment and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. RESULTS: Mental development and adaptive behavior scores decreased over age. Infants with changes in their primary caregiver had lower motor and adaptive behavior scores than infants remaining with consistent caregivers. Higher mental, motor, and adaptive behavior scores were associated with more positive attention and more negative control, whereas better language abilities were associated only with more positive attention. Child, maternal, and family characteristics had lesser effects. HIV-infected infants and infants of mothers with more education had lower mental, motor, and adaptive behavior scores. Male gender and more family conflict were associated with lower motor and adaptive behavior scores. Infants from smaller families had lower mental scores. CONCLUSIONS: Because both parenting quality and consistency of the primary caregiver influenced developmental outcomes, interventions with the mothers of these infants need to focus both on improving the quality of parenting and reducing the frequency of primary caregiver changes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".