Long-term motor development after hypothermia-treated hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims To describe longitudinal motor development in children treated with therapeutic- hypothermia (TH) due to neonatal hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy (HIE) and to explore motor functioning in early adolescence. Material and methods Children treated with TH due to HIE during 2007–2009, in Stockholm, participated in a prospective follow-up study. Motor development was assessed on four occasions, reported as percentiles and at mean ages. Alberta Infant Motor Scale was used at 0.35 years of age, Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development-III at 2.1 years and Movement Assessment Battery for Children (MABC-2) at 7.3 and 11.1 years of age. MABC-2 Checklist was completed by parents at 7.3 and 11.1 years of age. General cognition was assessed using Wechsler Intelligence Scales for Children Fifth Edition (WISC-V). Results Thirty-one percent (14/45) of the children had a motor score ≤ 15 th percentile, indicating risk of motor difficulties at 11.1 years of age, and simultaneously the scores from parents of 52% (23/44), indicating risk of motor difficulties in the everyday context. These children had significantly lower motor percentile at 2.1 years of age, but within the normal range. Longitudinal motor development displayed a weak association with WISC-V Full Scale IQ (r s 0.38, p = 0.013). Conclusion Among survivors of hypothermia-treated HIE free of moderate/severe cerebral palsy, a third had MABC-2 scores indicating risk of motor difficulties at 11.1 years of age. As motor difficulties became more apparent over time, we suggest that children treated with TH due to neonatal HIE should be followed into at least middle school age.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".