MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Maternal HIV status and motor milestone acquisition among Ghanaian infants

2009· article· en· W335882909 on OpenAlexaff
Anna Lartey, Grace S. Marquis, Rafael Pérez‐Escamilla, Robert Mazur, Daniel Sellen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV-related health complications and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcGill University
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsSittingMilestoneHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)MedicineCrawlingMotor skillDevelopmental MilestonePhysical therapyPediatricsPhysiologyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As part of the RIING project (Research to Improve Infant Nutrition and Growth) we examined infants' motor milestone (MM) acquisition in relation to Ghanaian mothers' HIV status. Mothers' prenatally diagnosed as HIV positive (n=104), HIV negative (n=132) and HIV status unknown (n=129) were followed up twice weekly at home for MM assessment from 4 to 12 months. At each home visit the following were assessed: i) sitting without support, ii) hands and knees crawling, iii) standing with assistance, iv) walking with assistance, v) standing alone, and vi) walking alone. The mean age (days) for MM achievement was not significantly different among children of the three groups of mothers (all groups combined: sitting without support 170.7± 24.5 d, hands and knees crawling 243.0± 34.9 d, standing with assistance 261.0± 38.9 d, walking with assistance 295.3± 46.8 d, standing alone 329.0± 36.7 d, and walking alone 350.3± 35.1 d) However, by 12 months 15.4 % of the HIV positive, 31.8% of the HIV negative, and 10.1% of the HIV unknown mothers' children were walking alone (p<0.05). The results suggest possible influence of maternal HIV status on child MM acquisition. Funded by NIH Grant HD436020

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicHIV-related health complications and treatments→French-language works237,207→