Dietary Practice and Physical Activity in Children with Down Syndrome and Their Siblings in Saudi Arabia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Feeding difficulties and inappropriate nutrition are common problems among children with Down Syndrome (DS). Objective: The aim of this study is to investigate the dietary practice and physical activity among children with DS. Methodology: The study groups were pre-pubertal DS boys and girls, aged 5 to 12 years clinically and cytogenetically proven to be suffering from DS. Healthy siblings, closest in age to the DS children were used as a control group. Breast feeding, eating difficulties, fast food intake, and physical activity were measured for both groups. Results: During infancy period, 36.4% of the DS children were bottle fed, compared to only 5.5% of the normal siblings. Nearly half of the breast-fed DS children were fed for duration of less than 6 months. The percentage of the DS children experiencing dietary difficulties is significantly higher compared to the siblings. Concerning physical activity, 73.1% of DS children did not exercise as compared to 44.2% of the control siblings. Conclusion: Controlling feeding practices and encouraging Down syndrome children to participate in physical activity either through support from parents or through designing special programs and facilities and are two avenues that can be used for obesity prevention.
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 | 0.000 | 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".