MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2763651105 · doi:10.1093/pch/19.6.e35-67

69: Bayley-III Outcomes at 18–21 Months Corrected Age for a Canadian Cohort of Infants Born <29 Weeks Gestation

2014· article· en· W2763651105 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dianne Creighton, Abhay Lodha, Annette Majnemer, Diane Moddemann, Peter Church, D Lee, Françine Lefebvre

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayley Scales of Infant DevelopmentGestational ageToddlerMedicinePediatricsCohortMotor skillGross motor skillGestationBirth weightCognitionPregnancyPsychomotor learningPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Neonatal Follow-up Network (CNFUN) monitors the outcomes of infants born <29 weeks gestational age (GA) at 26 neonatal follow-up centres across Canada. The use of a standardized assessment tool, the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development – Third Edition (Bayley-III), at a common age allows for systematic evaluation of cognitive, language and motor development across sites. To describe the cognitive, language and motor development at 18 to 21 months corrected age (CA) for the cohort of CNFUN preterm infants born April 1 2009 to July 1 2011. Trained and qualified Bayley-III testers administered the assessment of cognitive, language and motor abilities to preterm infants at 18 to 21 months CA. Bayley-III composite scores are normally distributed and have a mean of 100, SD 15. Scores <85 are considered below the normal range and are defined here as indicating impairment. Results are presented by gestational age at birth (GA) and by birthweight (BW) category. Of 2528 infants born <29 weeks GA, 2109 (83.4%) were seen in follow-up at 18 to 21 months CA. Cognitive composite scores were obtained for 1958 (92.8%) infants, language composite scores for 1899 (90.0%), and motor composite scores for 1887 (89.5%). The table shows outcomes by GA and by BW category. A high rate of below normal scores was evident for infants born at younger gestational ages and lower birthweights, indicating impairments at 18 to 21 months corrected age, especially with respect to language and motor development. Gestational age specific data on outcomes at 18 to 21 months will be helpful for counseling.

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)0.001
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicInfant Development and Preterm Care→French-language works237,207→