Correlates and Trajectories of Preterm Infant Sucking Patterns and Sucking Organization at Term Age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Premature infants may experience increased difficulty with nutrition and growth. Successful oral feeding is an important factor associated with discharge readiness. Despite the importance of feeding as a growth-fostering process, little empiric evidence exists to guide recommendations for early interventions. PURPOSE: Evaluate whether specific elements of sucking, during preterm initiation of oral feeding, predict sucking organization at corrected term age. METHODS: Sucking performance of 88 preterm infants born between 24 and 34 weeks of post-menstrual age was measured at baseline and term (33-35 and 40 ± 1.5 weeks). Participants were divided into 4 groups (quartiles) based on initial measures of performance including number of sucks, number of bursts, sucks per burst, and maximum pressure. Stability in sucking organization was assessed by comparing changes in infant's quartile location from baseline to term. RESULTS: A correlation between quartile location was observed for mean maximum pressure (PMAX): infants with PMAX in the lowest quartile (poorest performance) were significantly more likely to remain in the lowest quartile at term (P < .000); infants in the highest quartile (best performance) at baseline were significantly more likely to be in the highest quartile at term (P < .000). IMPLICATION FOR PRACTICE: Infants with the weakest sucking pressures at 34 weeks of post-menstrual age continue to be at risk for less than optimal feeding skills at 40 weeks of post-menstrual age. Early identification of at-risk infants may allow for effective interventions to potentially decrease long-term feeding problems. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Future research should focus on the development of personalized interventions to address attributes of problematic feeding such as sucking efficiency.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".