MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2930394094 · doi:10.1080/01942638.2019.1573775

Sensory Processing in Young Children with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder

2019· article· en· W2930394094 on OpenAlexaff
Brenda Fjeldsted, Xue Lin

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical & Occupational Therapy In Pediatrics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaHealth Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensory processingFetal alcoholFetal Alcohol Spectrum DisorderPrenatal alcohol exposureToddlerMedicineSensory systemSensationAudiologyPopulationIntervention (counseling)Fetal alcohol syndromePediatricsPsychologyPsychiatryDevelopmental psychologyAlcoholPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims: To examine and compare sensory processing in children diagnosed with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) to children designated as “at risk” for neurodevelopmental disorders and FASD, associated with Prenatal Alcohol Exposure (PAE). Method: A retrospective chart review methodology was applied to examine sensory processing in a clinic referred sample of 90 children under the age of 3 with PAE of which 28 children were diagnosed with FASD and 62 were in the “at risk” category. Results: Young children with FASD rated significantly lower on the Infant/Toddler Sensory Profile in auditory processing and low registration and more often in the probable difference range in sensory sensitivity and sensation avoiding. Some children in both groups demonstrated definite differences in low threshold scores. Conclusions: Sensory processing differences in young children with FASD are supported when compared to children with PAE who are “at risk” for future diagnoses. Occupational therapists should consider sensory processing when assessing and providing early intervention services to this population.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations28
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical & Occupational Therapy In PediatricsSame topicPrenatal Substance Exposure EffectsFrench-language works237,207