Bibliographic record
Abstract
Infants' advances in locomotion relate to advances in communicative development. However, little is known about these relations in infants at risk for delays in these domains and whether they may extend to earlier achievements in gross motor development in infancy. We examined whether advances in sitting and prone locomotion are related to communicative development in infants who have an older sibling with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and are at risk for motor and communication delays (heightened-risk; HR). We conducted a longitudinal study with 37 HR infants who did not receive an ASD diagnosis at 36 months. Infants were observed monthly between the ages of 5 and 14 months. We assessed gross motor development using the Alberta Infant Motor Scales (AIMS) and recorded ages of onset of verbal and nonverbal communicative behaviors. Results indicated increased presence of early gross motor delay from 5 to 10 months. In addition, there were positive relations between sitting and gesture and babble onset and between prone development and gesture onset. Thus, links between gross motor development and communication extend to at-risk development and provide a starting point for future research on potential cascading consequences of motor advances on communication development.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".