Influence of supine sleep positioning on early motor milestone acquisition
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
This study aimed to determine whether supine sleep-positioned infants have delayed motor skills at age 4 and 6 months, and if delays are associated with decreased exposure to prone position. One 4 and one 6-month-old sample of healthy infants born at term were recruited. Motor assessments included the Peabody Developmental Motor Scale (PDMS) and Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS). Parents completed an infant behavior diary for 3 consecutive days. Seventy-one 4-month-old infants were assessed (38 males; mean age 4.4 mo, standard deviation [SD] 0.2). Mean motor scores were close to normative standards (AIMS 47.7, SD 19.6; PDMS gross motor quotient [GMQ] 96.3, SD 6.5; PDMS fine motor quotient [FMQ] 99.2, SD 4.8). No infant scored below cut-off values used to identify motor delay. Milestones less likely to be achieved included extended arm support in prone, hands to feet in supine, and sitting with arm support. Exposure to 'tummy time' while awake was correlated with AIMS scores (r = 0.38, p < 0.01). F i fty 6-month-old infants were assessed (21 males; mean age 6.4 mo, SD 0.4). Mean scores were shifted down for all scales, and as much as 1 SD for PDMS (AIMS 44.5, SD 21.6; PDMS GMQ 85.7, SD 7.6; PDMS FMQ 88.9, SD 9.0). Only 22% of 6-month-olds could sit without arm support versus 50% expected in a normative sample. Remarkably, 22% of our sample exhibited gross motor delays (quotient <78). Tummy time (awake) was significantly associated with the AIMS (r = 0.64) and PDMS GMQ (r = 0.55) and FMQ (r = 0.33) quotients, even after adjusting for confounders. Typically developing infants who were sleep-positioned in supine had delayed motor development by age 6 months, and this was significantly associated with limited exposure to awake prone positioning. This has important implications for interpreting motor assessments of infants at risk and for preventing inappropriate referrals.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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