Effect of an oral stimulation program on sucking skill maturation of preterm infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study assessed the effect of an oral stimulation program on the maturation of sucking skills of preterm infants. Thirty-two preterm infants (13 males, 19 females), appropriate size for gestational age (gestational age at birth 28 wks, SD 1.2wks; birth weight 1002g, SD 251g), were randomly placed into experimental and control groups. The experimental group received a daily 15-minute oral stimulation program, consisting of stroking the peri- and intra-oral structures, for 10 days before the start of oral feedings. Sucking measures were monitored with a specially-designed nipple-bottle apparatus. Results indicate that the experimental group achieved full oral feedings 7 days sooner than the control group, and demonstrated greater overall intake (%), rate of milk transfer (mL/min), and amplitude of the expression component of sucking (mmHg). There was no difference in sucking stage maturation, sucking frequency, and amplitude of the suction component of sucking. Endurance, defined as ability to sustain the same sucking stage, sucking burst duration, and suction and expression amplitudes throughout a feeding session, was not significantly different between the two groups. The stimulation program enhanced the expression component of sucking, resulting in better oral feeding performance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".