Response to Pediatric Physical Therapy in Infants With Positional Preference and Skull Deformation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pediatric physical therapy seems to reduce skull deformation in infants with positional preference. However, not all infants show improvement. OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to determine which infant and parent characteristics were related to responses to pediatric physical therapy in infants who were 2 to 4 months old and had positional preference, skull deformation, or both. DESIGN: This was a prospective cohort study. METHODS: Infants who were 2 to 4 months old and had positional preference, skull deformation, or both were recruited by pediatric physical therapists at the start of pediatric physical therapy. The primary outcome was a good response or a poor response (moderate or severe skull deformation) at 4.5 to 6.5 months of age. Potential predictors for responses to pediatric physical therapy were assessed at baseline with questionnaires, plagiocephalometry, and the Alberta Infant Motor Scale. Univariate and multiple logistic regression analyses with a stepwise backward elimination method were performed. RESULTS: A total of 657 infants participated in the study. At follow-up, 364 infants (55.4%) showed a good response to therapy, and 293 infants (44.6%) showed a poor response. Multiple logistic regression analysis resulted in the identification of several significant predictors for a poor response to pediatric physical therapy at baseline: starting therapy after 3 months of age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=1.50, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]=1.04-2.17), skull deformation (plagiocephaly [aOR=2.64, 95% CI=1.67-4.17] or brachycephaly [aOR=3.07, 95% CI=2.09-4.52]), and a low parental satisfaction score (aOR=2.64, 95% CI=1.67-4.17). A low parental satisfaction score indicates low parental satisfaction with the infant's head shape. LIMITATIONS: Information about pediatric physical therapy was collected retrospectively and included general therapy characteristics. Because data were collected retrospectively, no adjustment in therapy for individual participants could be made. CONCLUSIONS: Several predictors for responses to pediatric physical therapy in infants who were 2 to 4 months old and had positional preference, skull deformation, or both were identified. Health care professionals can use these predictors in daily practice to provide infants with more individualized therapy, resulting in a better chance for a good outcome.
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".