82: Educational Program On Developmentally-Supportive Care for Parents of Extremely Preterm Children: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Developmental interventions for parents of preterm infants have been shown to improve parental outcomes. We developed a family-focused educational program of developmentally-supportive care using a multimodal approach that integrates web-based technologies. To assess the effect of our program on parental outcomes at four months corrected age (CA) among parents of extremely preterm infants. Preliminary clinical trial with a historical comparison group. Families with preterm infants born <29 weeks and admitted at Ste-Justine Hospital NICU were recruited, with a total of 55 in each comparison and intervention groups. At four months CA, parents completed the Parental Cognitions and Conduct Toward the Infant scale, the Parenting Stress Index, and the Bates Parental Perception of Infant Temperament scale. Comparisons were made using T-test and chi square analyses. Mean gestational age was 27±3 weeks and birth weight 1010±236 g. The table shows parental outcomes by intervention group (table1). Analyses with the current available data (comparison: n=48, intervention: n=38), demonstrated no significant difference between the two groups regarding mean scores and proportion of parents scoring in the abnormal range. The program in the present format did not show benefits on short-term parental outcomes. Using a more interactive and individualized web-based approach may be an option for improving our program and outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".