Reduced fidgety movements in child prenatally exposed to SARS-CoV-2: a case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Case presentation: A male baby born by Cesarean section at 37 weeks (APGAR 9/9), weighing 4280 g, stature of 53 cm and cephalic perimeter of 38 cm. The 29 years-old mother (G5P4A1), previously hypertensive, had an active COVID-19 infection during childbirth. She had no other comorbidities. At four months, he presented with motor skills developmental delay, showcasing hypertonia of the lower limbs and axial hypotonia. Subsequently, he was submitted to various evaluations, such as the Hammersmith neurological evaluation, in which he achieved a score of 59 and as Alberta's Infant Motor Scale (scoring 12), attaining a percentile of 10. Finally, he underwent the General Movement Assessment (GMA), in which he presented abnormal fidgety movements, lack of foot-to-foot contact, and hand-to-hand contact, both expected at this age. Discussion: The case under consideration refers to a child, prenatally exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, who presented with motor skills dysfunction. Although many viral maternal infections are well associated with neurodevelopmental disorders, the effects of prenatal exposure to the COVID-19 virus on child development are still not well established. With this in mind, it is important to consider this type of infection's inflammatory potential, which can trigger maternal immune activation, mainly when associated with the inflammatory profile of the first and third semesters, and generate immunological responses strong enough to impair fetal development. In addition, the General Movement Assessment is a tool that evaluates possible early changes in neurodevelopment and it is already being used to describe abnormal fidgety movements of babies whose mothers had COVID-19 during their pregnancy. Based on the GMA results from the presented case, the child could be at risk for future neurological disorders. Final comments: The consequences of prenatal exposure to the COVID-19 virus are not entirely known. Because of this, neurodevelopmental abnormalities observed in children submitted to these inflammatory conditions should be reported and investigated for further clarification. Publication History Article published online: 18 September 2023 © 2023. Academia Brasileira de Neurologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda. Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".