MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2787924541 · doi:10.3138/ptc.2017-13

Gross Motor Outcomes of Children Born Prematurely in Northern Ontario and Followed by a Neonatal Follow-Up Programme

2018· article· en· W2787924541 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Roxanne Bélanger, Chantal Mayer-Crittenden, Michèle Minor-Corriveau, Manon Robillard

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiotherapy Canada · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGross motor skillMedicineGestational agePediatricsLow birth weightBirth weightMotor skillPremature birthPregnancyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: The developing brain of a premature infant is vulnerable to injury. As a result, the long-term consequences of a premature birth include motor deficits, cognitive and behavioural problems. It is crucial to identify motor dysfunction during the preschool period because it interferes with a child's ability to explore the world. The goals of this study were to (1) provide preliminary data on the gross motor outcomes of children born prematurely and (2) determine the proportion and characteristics of the children who had maintained delays over the course of follow-up. Method: A retrospective chart review was conducted on all infants monitored by a neonatal follow-up programme. Each child was assessed by a single physiotherapist from birth until age 2 years. Of the 107 cases identified, 97 individuals were retained for analysis; they had a mean gestational age of 31.1 (SD 2.9) weeks and a mean birth weight of 1.66 (SD 0.53) kilograms. Results: The majority of children assessed were found to have gross motor outcomes in the average range. Children with scores below the average range were most often born very preterm (VPT) or moderately preterm (MPT), with very low or low birth weight, respectively. A total of 17 participants were referred to physiotherapy to address the gross motor delays identified in the follow-up programme; 14 of these 17 had previously been identified as delayed and were being monitored. Late preterm (LPT) children (n=6) were most often referred, followed by those born extremely preterm (EPT) and VPT (n=4). In total, 56 children were identified as delayed at one assessment point but were found to be within normal limits by the end of the follow-up period. Conclusion: It is important to periodically monitor premature children. A longitudinal, population-based study is also needed to provide more data on the predictors and long-term motor outcomes of MPT and LPT children.

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)0.000
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 score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations12
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiotherapy CanadaSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207