MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Differential Patterns of Development: The Interaction of Birth Weight, Temperament, and Maternal Behavior

2001· article· en· W2319166892 on OpenAlexaff
Kathleen S. Gorman, Andrea Lourie, Naseem Choudhury

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTemperamentBayley Scales of Infant DevelopmentBirth weightPsychomotor learningDevelopmental psychologySmall for gestational agePsychologyLongitudinal studyLow birth weightBirth orderGestational agePediatricsMedicinePersonalityPregnancyCognitionPopulationPsychiatryBiologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A short-term longitudinal study of 83 families compared patterns of development between full-term small for gestational age (SGA) and normal birth weight (NBW) infants. Data were collected on infant temperament and maternal interaction at 3 and 6 months, and infant developmental outcomes at 6 months in order to investigate relationships between infant and maternal behavior, and developmental outcomes as a function of birth weight. Findings revealed few differences between SGA and NBW groups. However, the relations between infant temperament and maternal behavior varied as a function of birth weight and home environment. Specifically, more positive home environments were associated with higher ratings of maternal behavior and lower levels of infant negative reactivity for SGA but not for NBW infants. In addition, higher negative reactivity was related to lower performance on both the mental and psychomotor scales of the Bayley Scales of Infant Development (BSID), with stronger associations reported for SGA infants than for NBW infants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.740

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations34
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Developmental & Behavioral PediatricsSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207