Pregnancy hypertension and the risk for neuropsychological difficulties across early development: A brief report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite documented effects on fetal brain development, little is currently known about the relationship between maternal pregnancy hypertension and child neuropsychological outcomes. This brief report examined the association between maternal hypertension during pregnancy and children's social cognition and executive functioning when children were 18 months, 3 years, and 4.5 years. A community sample of 501 families (23 hypertensive mothers; 478 nonhypertensive) was recruited when children were newborns. Social cognition (including theory of mind [ToM]) and executive functioning (EF) were measured using a battery of age-appropriate standardized and/or observational tasks. Information on pregnancy and prenatal factors were measured via maternal report when children were newborns. After controlling for prenatal and demographic covariates, the presence of hypertension difficulties during pregnancy was associated with all measures of social cognition, ToM, and EF. A secondary analysis comparing the hypertension group (n = 23) to a nonhypertensive matched control group (n = 23) supported the effect of pregnancy hypertension on children's social-cognitive and EF development. Future studies using obstetrical records are encouraged based on these preliminary findings.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".