Motor development and sleep, play, and feeding positions in very‐low‐birthweight infants with and without white matter disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the association of infants' sleep and awake positioning with motor milestone acquisition as measured by the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS). Participants were 30 very-low-birthweight (VLBW) infants with preterm white matter disease (PTWMD; 21 males, nine females; mean birthweight [BW] 1,129 g [SD 338]; mean gestational age [GA] 28 wks [SD 2.44]); 21 VLBW infants without preterm WMD (PT; 13 males, eight females; mean BW 1,107 g [SD 370]; mean GA 28.05 wks [SD 2.21]); and 17 term infants (Term; seven males, 10 females; mean BW 3,565 g [SD 382]; mean GA 40 wks [SD 1.31]). Testing occurred at 1, 5, and 9 months of age (corrected for prematurity). Preferred positions during sleeping, playing, and feeding were obtained through parent interview. These positions and group were the independent variables. Prone sleeping was significantly and positively associated with motor development at all ages (1 mo: p=0.005; 5 mo: p=0.011; 9 mo: p=0.040). At 5 months, prone sleeping and playing were significantly and positively associated with AIMS scores (prone sleeping, p=0.016; prone playing, p=0.047). However, group was negatively associated with preterm white matter disease, with the PTWMD group having significantly lower AIMS scores than the Term group (p=0.029). At 9 months, sitting playing and group membership were significantly associated with AIMS scores (sitting playing, p=0.005; group, p=0.012). Prone positioning should be encouraged for awake time, particularly for infants with preterm white matter disease.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".