MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2762868030 · doi:10.1111/jcpp.12826

Impact of extremely low‐birth‐weight status on risk and resilience for depression and anxiety in adulthood

2017· article· en· W2762868030 on OpenAlexafffund
Ryan J. Van Lieshout, Michael H. Boyle, Lindsay Favotto, John E. Krzeczkowski, Calan Savoy, Saroj Saigal, Louis A. Schmidt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPsychopathologyAnxietyPsychologyLow birth weightDepression (economics)Risk factorBirth weightOdds ratioPsychological resilienceClinical psychologyPsychiatryMedicinePregnancyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Preterm birth is associated with an increased risk of depression and anxiety, but it is not known if this is due to greater exposure to risk, or if perinatal adversity amplifies the impact of traditional risk factors. This study sought to determine if exposure to perinatal adversity modifies associations between traditional risk and resilience factors and depression and anxiety in adulthood. METHODS: A sample of 142 extremely low-birth-weight (ELBW < 1,000 g) survivors and 133 sociodemographically matched normal birth weight (NBW) control participants was followed longitudinally to 22-26 years of age. Separate postnatal risk and resilience scales were created using eight risk and seven resilience factors, respectively. Depression and anxiety were assessed using the internalizing scale of the Young Adult Self-Report (YASR). This scale was also dichotomized at the 90th percentile to define clinically significant psychopathology. RESULTS: While the average number of risk exposures did not differ between groups, ELBW survivors were more susceptible to risk than NBW control participants. For the ELBW group, each additional risk factor resulted in a 2-point increase in internalizing scores, and two and a half times the odds of clinically significant internalizing symptoms (OR = 2.47, 95% CI = 1.63, 3.76). The protective effect of resiliency factors was also blunted among ELBW survivors. CONCLUSIONS: Extremely low-birth-weight survivors may be more sensitive to traditional risk factors for psychopathology and less protected by resiliency factors. Intervention strategies aimed at preventing or reducing exposure to traditional childhood risk factors for psychopathology may reduce the burden of mental illness in adult survivors of prematurity.

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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations41
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Child Psychology and PsychiatrySame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207