Peer Victimization in Extremely Low Birth Weight Survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Extremely low birth weight (ELBW; <1000 g) children may be at risk for experiencing peer victimization. We examined retrospectively reported peer victimization in ELBW and control children in the oldest known, prospectively followed, population-based birth cohort of ELBW survivors. METHOD: We compared levels of verbal and physical peer victimization in ELBW and control children. We also predicted peer victimization in the ELBW sample from child characteristics. RESULTS: ELBW children, especially girls, were at an increased risk for verbal, but not physical victimization. In addition, ELBW children with a higher IQ reported higher levels of verbal victimization, although ELBW females who had a lower body mass index in childhood reported higher levels of physical victimization. CONCLUSION: Findings highlight the need for parents and clinicians to be aware that ELBW girls, especially those with a lower body mass index in childhood, may be at increased risk of peer victimization, as are ELBW children with a higher IQ.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".