MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2590742045 · doi:10.4025/jphyseduc.v28i1.2811

MOTOR AND COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT PREDICTORS OF INFANTS OF ADOLESCENTS AND ADULTS MOTHERS

2017· article· en· W2590742045 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Luana Silva de Borba, Keila Ruttnig Guidony Pereira, Nádia Cristina Valentini

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physical Education · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCognitionDevelopmental psychologyCognitive developmentMotor skillPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RESUMOPouco se sabe sobre a repercussão para o desenvolvimento do bebê dos fatores ambientais e das tarefas cotidianas as quais a mãe adolescente está exposta.Por isso o presente estudo propôs identificar as associações e os preditores do desenvolvimento motor e cognitivo de bebês filhos de mães adolescentes e adultas.Foram avaliados 40 bebês com idade entre 0 e 18 meses, tendo 20 bebês em cada grupo -mães adolescentes e adultas.As avaliações foram através da Alberta Motor Infant Scale e Bayley Scale of Infant Development; Affordances in the Home Enviroment for Motor Development, Knowledge of Infant Development e Daily Activities of Infant.Observou-se forte associação entre motricidade e cognição (r²=0,88) em ambos os grupos estudados.Entre os bebês de mães adolescentes, a idade paterna, espaço domiciliar, a mãe não trabalhar fora de casa, escolaridade dos pais, quantidade de brinquedos e adultos na residência, as práticas parentais e o conhecimento dos pais se mostraram preditores do desenvolvimento motor.Para o desenvolvimento cognitivo, mostraram-se preditores o fato dos pais morarem juntos, a quantidade de quartos na residência e as práticas parentais.No grupo de bebês de mães adultas, o desenvolvimento cognitivo, parto cesariano, os pais morarem juntos, quantidade de quartos na residência, e as práticas parentais foram preditores do desenvolvimento motor.Já como preditores do desenvolvimento cognitivo, permaneceram no modelo de regressão o desenvolvimento motor, quantidade de dias na UTI, número de quartos na residência e prática parentais.A interdependência entre cognição e motricidade, as características da família e da residência, e as práticas parentais foram os principais determinantes da trajetória do infante.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physical EducationSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207