Starting strong: Dietary, behavioral, and environmental factors that promote “strength” from conception to age 2 years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Beginning with conception and continuing through childhood and adolescence, the word “strength” connotes the totality of optimal early bone and tissue growth; neural wiring of the brain; and acquisition of fine motor, gross motor, language, and socioemotional skills. The robustness of each of these attributes depend on 3 critical epigenetic (external) factors: the quality of nutrition; positive adult nurturing; and experiences acquired within a stimulating, safe environment that affords free exploration. This review highlights the relationship between the epigenetic factors in the period of conception to age 2 years and a child’s future health, cognitive capacity, and social aptitude, which collectively comprise their “strength”. This paper was presented as part of the 2018 Strength Summit conference entitled, The Role of Strength in Optimal Health and Well-being. Novelty Strength in infants signifies the totality of optimal early growth and neural wiring of the brain. Strength at this life stage also includes the acquisition of motor, language, and socioemotional skills. Three epigenetic factors are critical during birth to 24 months: nutrition, nurturing, and free exploration.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".