Reliability of the Assessment of Mother–Infant Sensitivity—Chinese Version for Preterm and Term Taiwanese Mother–Infant Dyads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The objectives of this study were to translate and modify the Assessment of Mother-Infant Sensitivity scale into a Chinese version (modified AMIS-C) and to examine its reliability with preterm and term Taiwanese mother-infant dyads. METHOD: A total of 241 mother-infant pairs (179 preterm dyads and 62 term dyads) were prospectively recorded and their behaviour in feeding assessed using the modified AMIS-C when infants were at 4 and 6 months corrected age. A subset of the sample was used for interrater reliability testing, and the whole sample was used for assessment of internal consistency. RESULTS: Interrater reliability was high for the modified AMIS-C section and total scores (intra-class correlation coefficients=0.91-0.99). Internal consistency was good to excellent for the maternal section and total score (α=0.71-0.86) and was fair to good for the infant and dyadic section score (α=0.44-0.75). CONCLUSIONS: The modified AMIS-C scale is a clinically feasible and reliable instrument for assessing mother-infant interaction of preterm and term dyads during early infancy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".