Parent behaviors moderate the relationship between neonatal pain and internalizing behaviors at 18 months corrected age in children born very prematurely
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children born very preterm (≤ 32 weeks gestation) exhibit greater internalizing (anxious/depressed) behaviors compared to term-born peers as early as 2 years corrected age (CA); however, the role of early stress in the etiology of internalizing problems in preterm children remains unknown. Therefore, we examined the relationship between neonatal pain and internalizing behavior at 18 months CA in children born very preterm and examined whether parent behavior and stress moderated this relationship. Participants were 145 children (96 very preterm, 49 full term) assessed at 18 months CA. Neonatal data were obtained from medical and nursing chart review. Neonatal pain was defined as the number of skin-breaking procedures. Cognitive ability was measured with the Bayley Scales of Infant Development II. Parents completed the Parenting Stress Index III, Child Behavior Checklist 1.5-5, and participated in a videotaped play session with their child, which was coded using the Emotional Availability Scale IV. Very preterm children displayed greater Internalizing behaviors compared to full-term control children (P=.02). Parent Sensitivity and Nonhostility moderated the relationship between neonatal pain and Internalizing behavior (all P<.05); higher parent education (P<.03), lower Parenting Stress (P=.001), and fewer children in the home (P<.01) were associated with lower Internalizing behavior in very preterm children, after adjusting for neonatal medical confounders, gender, and child cognitive ability (all P>.05). Parent Emotional Availability and stress were not associated with Internalizing behaviors in full-term control children. Positive parent interaction and lower stress appears to ameliorate negative effects of neonatal pain on stress-sensitive behaviors in this vulnerable population.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".