DOZ047.20: Growth, feeding difficulties, and developmental scores in children born with esophageal atresia: a single-center study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Children with repaired tracheoesophageal fistula/oesophageal atresia (TOF/OA) often have ongoing feeding difficulties and poor growth related to esophageal dysmotility, strictures, gastroesophageal reflux, aspiration, and respiratory infections. The impact of neurocognitive development on feeding in this cohort is less well studied. Objective The objective of this study was to investigate the growth, parent-reported feeding difficulties, and developmental scores of children with TOF/OA at The Children's Hospital at Westmead in Sydney, Australia. Methods The validated Montreal Children's Hospital Feeding Scale (MCH-FS) was completed by parents of patients aged 6 months to 6 years at a multidisciplinary aerodigestive clinic between February 2016 and October 2018. Growth, developmental outcomes (using the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development [BAYLEY-III]), demographic information, OA subtype, and associated comorbidities were reviewed. Results Forty-three caregivers completed the MCH-FS at least once, with questionnaires returned up to five times, totaling 101 reviews. The mean age was 4 years (± 1.9) and 53% were female. Thirty percent of patients were born prematurely and 30% had VACTERL association. Mean [± SD] growth z-scores were below WHO/CDC means for weight (−0.86 ± 1.37), length/height (−0.70 ± 1.2), and weight-for-length/BMI (−0.35 ± 1.15). BAYLEY-III scores were available for 27 children at 13 (± 1) months. Mean scores for four domains were within ‘average’ range (8–12): cognition (11 ± 2), receptive language (8 ± 3), expressive language (8 ± 2), and fine motor skills (9 ± 2). The mean gross motor score was below average (7 ± 3). Parent-reported feeding difficulties were moderate. When first completed, cumulative MCH-FS scores indicated 44% of patients had severe feeding difficulties, 40% moderate, and 14% mild. Sixty percent of patients required referral to a speech pathologist. However, most parents did not feel that these feeding difficulties influenced the relationship with their child or their family (88% and 84%, respectively). Conclusions The majority of patients in the cohort experienced significant feeding difficulties and some below average developmental scores, underscoring the need for multidiscplinary support for children born with TOF/OA. Further work in correlating growth, developmental, and feeding outcomes within subjects will assist in identifying early risk factors that may highlight infants most predisposed to these challenges, and who may benefit from early intervention.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".