MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283741871 · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2022.884251

Impact of Early Childhood Malnutrition on Adult Brain Function: An Evoked-Related Potentials Study

2022· article· en· W4283741871 on OpenAlexafffund
Kassandra Roger, Phetsamone Vannasing, Julie Tremblay, María L. Bringas-Vega, Cyralene P. Bryce, Arielle G. Rabinowitz, Pedro A. Valdés‐Sosa, Janina R. Galler, Anne Gallagher

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Human Neuroscience · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de Montréal
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéNational Institutes of HealthFondation NestléNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaRéseau en Bio-Imagerie du Quebec
KeywordsBrain functionMalnutritionNeuroscienceBrain developmentAudiologyMedicinePsychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

More than 200 million children under the age of 5 years are affected by malnutrition worldwide according to the World Health Organization. The Barbados Nutrition Study (BNS) is a 55-year longitudinal study on a Barbadian cohort with histories of moderate to severe protein-energy malnutrition (PEM) limited to the first year of life and a healthy comparison group. Using quantitative electroencephalography (EEG), differences in brain function during childhood (lower alpha1 activity and higher theta, alpha2 and beta activity) have previously been highlighted between participants who suffered from early PEM and controls. In order to determine whether similar differences persisted into adulthood , our current study used recordings obtained during a Go-No-Go task in a subsample of the original BNS cohort [population size (N) = 53] at ages 45–51 years. We found that previously malnourished adults [sample size ( n ) = 24] had a higher rate of omission errors on the task relative to controls ( n = 29). Evoked-Related Potentials (ERP) were significantly different in participants with histories of early PEM, who presented with lower N2 amplitudes. These findings are typically associated with impaired conflict monitoring and/or attention deficits and may therefore be linked to the attentional and executive function deficits that have been previously reported in this cohort in childhood and again in middle adulthood.

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)0.001
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Human NeuroscienceSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207