EFFECTS OF PREFERRED SLEEP AND AWAKE POSITIONS ON MOTOR MILESTONE DEVELOPMENT OF VERY LOW BIRTHWEIGHT INFANTS (VLBW) WITH AND WITHOUT WHITE MATTER DISEASE (WMD)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose/Hypothesis: The focus of our research was to evaluate the association of preferred sleep and awake positioning on motor milestone acquisition of infants born prematurely with VLBW and with/without WMD. Number of Subjects: Participants were sixty-eight infants: 30 premature infants born VLBW and WMD (PTWMD), 21 premature infants born VLBW without WMD (PT) and 17 full term infants (FT). Testing and parent interview took place in the Developmental Motor Control laboratory at Boston University when infants were 1, 5 and 9 months of age. Parents signed consent forms prior to participation in the study, in accordance with the policies of Boston University Institutional Review Board and the respective hospital. Materials/Methods: Motor milestone development was recorded using the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) a 58-item assessment of gross motor performance designed for the identification and evaluation of motor development of infants aged birth to 18 months of age. Reliability between two testers for two, one-month old infants and four, 5 month old infants was established with a Pearson product moment correlation of 0.93 (one month) and 0.92 (5 months). Parents were interviewed by the first author and asked their infants preferred position(s) for sleep (then eat, then play). Multiple regression was used to predict AIMS scores with group (PTWMD, PT, FT) and different positions as the between-subject factors. Alpha level was set at 0.05. Results: At 1 month, the prone position for sleep was positively correlated with AIMS total scores (P = 0.039). At 5 months, the prone position for sleep and play were positively correlated with AIMS total scores; PTWMD was negatively correlated with AIMS total score (prone for sleep: P = 0.004; prone for play: P = 0.027; PTWMD: P = 0.039). At 9 months, the prone position for sleep was positively correlated with AIMS total scores; sitting for play, PTWMD and PT were negatively correlated with AIMS total score. (prone for sleep: P = 0.020; sitting for play: P = 0.001; PTWMD: P = 0.002; PT: P = 0.001). However, group was negatively correlated with AIMS total scores at 5 and 9 months (5 months: PTWMD: P = 0.039; 9 months: PTWMD: P = 0.002, PT: P = 0.001). There was a significant difference for infants who slept prone, with increased ability on the AIMS total scores at 5 months (P = 0.007, r2 = 0.143). At 9 months, infants who chose sitting positions for play or were in the PTWMD group had decreased ability on the AIMS total scores (sitting for play: P = 0.005, PTWMD: P = 0.017, r2 = 0.491). Conclusions: Sleeping supine did not impact motor milestone development contrary to what has been previously reported. Prone sleep and play, however promoted improved AIMS scores. Clinical Relevance: Supine sleep positions should continue to be promoted, but prone activities, particularly for infants who are VLBW/WMD should be highly encouraged.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".