Desenvolvimento motor e cognitivo de bebês de mães adolescentes e adultas: estudo longitudinal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aims of this study were to investigate in infants of adolescent and adult mothers: (1) the risk factors for child development; (2) changes in cognitive and motor development over four months of follow-up, (3) correlation between cognitive and motor development over four months of follow-up. This is a longitudinal study with 40 infants, 20 infants of adolescent mothers and 20 of adult mothers from Porto Alegre and Butiá, state of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. Three evaluations of motor and cognitive development were performed using the Alberta Motor Infant Scale (AIMS) and the Bayley Scale Infant Development II. Significant difference in the supine position of AIMS was observed between groups in the third evaluation. Infants of adolescent mothers showed lower scores than those of adult mothers. The motor scores of each position and total AIMS score showed significant difference during overall time and in each group. The Bayley-II mental score also showed significant difference during overall time and in each group. There was a positive, strong and significant association between AIMS and Bayley scores in all three evaluation stages as in the group of infants of adolescent and adult mothers. It was concluded that infants of adolescent mothers showed worse results in the supine position during the third evaluation than those of adult mothers. There was a significant association between motor and cognitive development in both groups of infants over time.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".