Mealtime Behaviors of Young Children: A Comparison of Normative and Clinical Data
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
The objective of this study was to compare the behavior of healthy young children around feeding and mealtimes to the behavior of two clinical groups, children referred for feeding problems without related medical issues and those with medical issues associated with the feeding problems. Using the Behavioral Pediatrics Feeding Assessment Scale, data were obtained for 96 healthy children between the ages of 9 months and 7 years, and descriptive information is presented in the paper on these normal mealtime behaviors. In comparing this normative data to similar data obtained from the clinical groups, our primary purpose was to investigate whether children with feeding problems engage in fundamentally different behaviors (maladaptive) or similar behaviors, but at an increased frequency to normal children. Factor analysis identified five common patterns of behavior across the three groups. The difference in parental report of feeding difficulties between healthy and clinical groups appears to reflect the frequency in which the child with feeding difficulties engages in the problematic behavior, rather than fundamental differences in behaviors exhibited during mealtimes.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it