ASSESSING MOTOR SKILLS TO INFORM A FETAL ALCOHOL SPECTRUM DISORDER DIAGNOSIS FOCUSING ON PERSONS OLDER THAN 12 YEARS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Motor impairments are one of the difficulties present in people prenatally exposed to alcohol, and are included in the diagnostic criteria for Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder. Objectives The aim of this review was to examine the extent and common types of motor impairment present in persons aged over 12 years prenatally exposed to alcohol as evidence for determining the skills that should be assessed and addressed in intervention. Methods A systematic review of current evidence using various electronic databases was conducted. Studies were appraised using a recognised clinical appraisal tool. Results Seven studies published between 1998 and 2014 met the inclusion criteria. There is some evidence that difficulties with fine motor skills, visual motor integration, and balance skills persist in people who have been prenatally exposed to alcohol. Most studies did not focus on adolescent or adult participants in isolation, making it difficult to generalise results. Varied methodological designs made it difficult to compare studies as few used common standardised assessments Conclusion A review of functional difficulties in each individual would be required to determine if a motor assessment is warranted. Further research is required using assessments recommended in diagnostic guidelines to determine the common motor difficulties seen in adolescents and adults.
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 | 0.007 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".