Longitudinal Development of Segmental Trunk Control in Full Term and Preterm Infants- a Pilot Study: Part I
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: No previous study examined trunk control development in preterm infants. The present study examined the longitudinal development of segmental trunk control from 4 to 12 months of (corrected) age in preterm infants in comparison with full-term infants.Methods: Thirty-one preterm infants and 30 full-term infants were recruited. All infants were tested monthly using the Segmental Assessment of Trunk Control and the Alberta Infant Motor Scale at 4, 8 and 12 months of age.Results: Segmental trunk control development was significantly delayed in the preterm infants. Statistically significant positive correlations were found between trunk control status and gross motor skills.Conclusion: This was first study showing that segmental trunk control development was significantly different in preterm infants. Segmental trunk control and gross motor performance were coupled in young infants. A dual focus on training upright trunk control and specific motor skills may maximise therapy outcomes for infants with motor delay.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".