MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329564833 · doi:10.1097/pep.0b013e3182a2f8a2

Commentary on “Motor Development of Infants With Univentricular Heart at the Ages of 16 and 52 Weeks”

2013· letter· en· W2329564833 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Barbara Sargent, Leesha Augustine

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Physical Therapy · 2013
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMotor skillHypoplastic left heart syndromePediatricsIntervention (counseling)Gross motor skillCardiologyHeart diseasePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How could I apply this information? Infants with hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS) and other types of functional univentricular heart (UVH) are at high risk for delayed motor development during the first year of life. Early therapeutic intervention may be necessary to advance motor development, particularly for those infants with HLHS and UVH who have undergone open-heart surgery. Specifically, extensive family education on the benefits of prone play may be critical once the infant is medically cleared to be positioned prone. In addition, direct intervention to promote motor development may be necessary due to the complex medical status of the infant and the family's level of comfort in progressing motor skills of an infant who has recently undergone cardiac surgery. What should I be mindful about when applying this information? It is unclear what factors were associated with the delayed motor development observed in infants with HLHS and UVH. All 23 infants with HLHS and 5 of 13 infants with UVH underwent 2 cardiac surgeries, yet Alberta Infant Motor Scale subtests were only provided for the HLHS and UVH infant groups as a whole. Therefore, it is unclear whether motor development was delayed only for the infants who underwent cardiac surgery or also for some infants who did not undergo surgical intervention. In addition, 6 infants with HLHS and 4 infants with UVH received physical therapy intervention during the course of the study; however, it is unclear whether these infants continued to demonstrate delayed development at the 12-month assessment and why a greater number of infants were not referred for therapeutic intervention. Infants with HLHS and those with UVH demonstrate delayed motor development, particularly in prone and standing skills; however, further research is necessary to clarify the factors associated with motor delay. Barbara Sargent PT, PhD, PCS University of Southern California, Los Angeles Leesha Augustine, PT, DPT Children's Hospital of Orange County, Orange, California

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score0.701

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Physical TherapySame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207