Reactions of young children to the MRI scanner environment
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seventy children aged 2 to 7 years were exposed to the MRI environment through a series of steps typical of a research study. Their willingness to proceed through the process was used to estimate the prevalence of fear. Thirty-seven children (53%; 95% confidence interval [41%, 65%]) completed the approach sequence. Although the correlation of child age in months (Mean (M) = 60.1, standard deviation = 16.5, N = 70) and highest successful step (M = 5.8, standard deviation = 2.6, 95% confidence interval [5.2, 6.4]) completed was not statistically significant at the 0.05 level, r (68) = 0.21, P = 0.08, 95% confidence interval [-0.03, 0.42], the proportion of children aged 6-7 years who successfully completed all steps (14 of 21, 67%, 95% confidence interval [50%, 84%]) was significantly different from the proportion of children aged 2-3 years who completed all steps (six of 23, 26%, 95% confidence interval [11%, 41%]) (Fisher's exact test, two-tailed P = 0.0148). A failure rate of at least 50% should be included into group size calculations when performing studies with young children (2-7 years), in addition to motion and other experimental factors.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it