An evaluation of factors influencing feeding in babies with a cleft palate with and without a cleft lip
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this article was to determine the impact of different bottles and teats for feeding babies with a cleft palate (with and without a cleft lip) on weight velocity, feeding behaviour, and maternal self-esteem. A mixed methods study incorporating the use of diaries to record feeding patterns of babies and levels of professional support received was used. Growth was assessed by converting weights into standard deviation scores and using the differences to express weight velocity over a six-week period. Visual analogue scales were used to assess mothers' perceptions of their children and themselves. The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Score (EPDS) was used to identify maternal depression. The study demonstrated that the most significant effect on weight was determined by cleft type. Babies with isolated clefts of the hard and soft palate experienced greater feeding problems and suffered the biggest weight losses. This remained significant independently of the type of bottle/teat used. Poor weight gain was also associated with a mother's low perception of herself and her child, and her tendency towards depression. The study highlights the importance of the early assessment of babies' feeding skills and regular follow-up and support from trained and experienced nurse specialists.
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) | 0.000 | 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".