Ankyloglossia severity in infants: maternal pain, self-efficacy, and functional aspects of breastfeeding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Objective: To analyze functional aspects of breastfeeding, self-efficacy, and pain reported by mothers during breastfeeding, in newborns with severe and mild ankyloglossia. Methods: This is an observational study, carried out with 81 babies with ankyloglossia, assessed by the Bristol Tongue Assessment Tool (severe: scores 0–3; mild: scores 4–6) nested in a cohort carried out at the University Hospital of the Federal University of Maranhão, São Luis, Brazil. The functional aspects of breastfeeding were analyzed using the Breastfeeding Observation Form of the United Nations Children's Fund (BOF-UNICEF) and the LATCH Scoring System. Breastfeeding self-efficacy was measured using the Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale — Short-Form. Pain indicators were evaluated by the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire. The significance level adopted was 5%. Results: Maternal age was 26.7±0.8 years, and 64.2% reported high school education. Most babies were male (67.9%), and the birth weight was 3232±60g. A significant association was detected in the sucking aspect evaluated by the BOF-UNICEF [β=0.22 (95%CI 0.07; 0.73), p-value=0.013]. However, the groups did not differ in the assessment of breastfeeding performed by the LATCH scale. The groups had no differences in the assessment of breastfeeding self-efficacy reported by mothers, and in pain scores. Conclusions: Despite the observation of sucking difficulty in infants with severe ankyloglossia., the quality of breastfeeding in general, maternal pain, and self-efficacy reported by mothers do not differ when compared with infants with mild ankyloglossia. Therefore, the severity of ankyloglossia seems not to affect the breastfeeding indicators.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
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".