Biopsychosocial Factors in Children Referred With Failure to Thrive: Modern Characterization for Multidisciplinary Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to characterize biopsychosocial characteristics in children with failure to thrive with a focus on 4 domains: medical, nutrition, feeding skills, and psychosocial characteristics. A retrospective cross-sectional chart review was conducted of children assessed at the Infant and Toddler Growth and Feeding Clinic from 2015 to 2016. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. One hundred thirty-eight children, 53.6% male, mean age 16.9 months (SD = 10.8), were included. Approximately one quarter of the children had complex medical conditions, medical comorbidities, and developmental delays. The mean weight-for-age percentile was 15.5 (SD = 23.9), and mean weight-for-length z score was −1.51 (SD = 1.4). A total of 22.5% of children had delayed oral-motor skills and 28.3% had oral aversion symptoms. Caregiver feeding strategies included force feeding (14.5%) and the use of distractions (47.1%). The multifactorial assessment of failure to thrive according to the 4 domains allowed for a better understanding of contributing factors and could facilitate multidisciplinary collaboration.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".