MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2771548991 · doi:10.1111/apa.14184

Cortisol and blood pressure levels decreased in fathers during the first hour of skin‐to‐skin contact with their premature babies

2017· article· en· W2771548991 on OpenAlexaffabout
Natalia Varela, Réjean Tessier, George M. Tarabulsy, Tamarha Pierce

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Paediatrica · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsCentre hospitalier de l'Université LavalUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSkin to skinBlood pressurePhysiologyEndocrinologyPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: Premature birth is an extremely stressful experience. In 2013 to 2014, we explored the physiological stress responses of fathers during their first skin-to-skin contact (SSC) with their new baby. METHODS: We recruited 49 fathers whose partners had given birth to a premature baby of up to 33 weeks and three days. The study, in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) of a Quebec hospital, measured the physiological stress responses of the fathers before and after they first experienced SSC with their new baby. Cortisol levels and blood pressure were measured, and a generalised estimating equation was used for the data analysis. RESULTS: The fathers' cortisol levels decreased from 10.55 nmol/L, with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of 9.61-11.59 at the beginning of the experiment to 8.26 nmol/L (95% CI: 7.51-9.07) after 75 minutes. Meanwhile, their systolic blood pressure decreased from 135.16 mmHg (95% CI: 130-140) to 125.25 mmHg (95% CI: 121-129). CONCLUSION: Fathers who held their baby in SSC for the first time showed a significant reduction in physiological stress responses. Our findings support hospital practices that enable fathers to experience their first intimate contact with their newborn infant in the NICU.

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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.481

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 head0.220
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations29
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa PaediatricaSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207