MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393636739 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.4058517

Mothers' and fathers' early tactile contact behaviors during triadic and dyadic parent-infant interactions immediately after birth and at 3-months postpartum: Implications for early care behaviors and intervention

2019· dataset· en· W4393636739 on OpenAlexaff
Marisa Mercuri, Dale M. Stack, Sabrina Trojan, Lorenzo Giusti, Francesco Morandi, Irene Mantis, Rosario Montirosso

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2019
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Therapy and Development
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)PsychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Raw data of the study "Mothers’ and fathers’ early tactile contact behaviors during triadic and dyadic parent-infant interactions immediately after birth and at 3-months postpartum: Implications for early care behaviors and intervention" :Mothers’ and fathers’ touch were investigated during their first naturalistic interaction with their newborns, and maternal touch was predicted from newborn to 3-months postpartum during the Still-Face (SF) procedure. Both parents displayed more nurturing types of touch when interacting with their infants for the first time. Maternal touch at newborn predicted maternal touch after, but not before, the SF 3-months later; more touch after birth was associated with more soothing, regulating, types of maternal touch following the SF, suggesting that the nature of these interactive contexts (post-birth, post-SF) may be parallel

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.012

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicChild Therapy and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207