No Delay in Age of Crawling, Standing or Walking with Pavlik Harness Treatment: A Prospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pavlik harness treatment is the standard of care for developmental dysplasia of the hip in infants younger than 6 months. The effect of Pavlik harness treatment on the achievement of motor milestones has not previously been reported. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, 35 patients were prospectively enrolled to participate and received questionnaires with sequential clinical visits monitoring treatment of their developmental dysplasia of the hip. One-sample Student t -tests assessed differences in milestone attainment age, and the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure was conducted to decrease the false discovery rate. Post hoc power analyses of each test were conducted. The age of achievement of eight early motor milestones were recorded and compared with a previously published cohort of healthy infants. RESULTS: Infants treated with a Pavlik harness achieved four early motor milestones markedly later than the reported age of achievement in a historical control group. These milestones included "roll supine" (5.3 vs. 4.5 months; P = 0.039), "roll prone" (5.7 vs. 5.0 months; P = 0.039), "sit" (6.4 vs. 5.2 months; P < 0.001), and "crawl on stomach" (7.7 vs. 6.6 months; P = 0.039). However, there was no difference in time to achievement of later motor milestones of "crawl on knees," "pull to stand," and "independent walking." CONCLUSION: Several early motor milestones were achieved at a statistically significantly later time than historical control subjects not treated in a Pavlik harness. Despite statistical significance, the small delays in early motor milestones were not thought to be clinically significant. No differences were observed in the later motor milestones, including knee crawling, standing, and independent walking. Clinicians and parents may be reassured by these findings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II-prospective study.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".