MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403997025 · doi:10.7759/cureus.72883

Assessment and Early Intervention in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit for a Preterm Infant With Williams Syndrome

2024· article· en· W4403997025 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ermioni Adamian, Emmanouil Trevlakis, Ourania Papadopoulou, Koukou Zoi, Eugenia Trevlaki, Alexandra Hristara-Papadopoulou

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicWilliams Syndrome Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeonatal intensive care unitIntervention (counseling)Psychological interventionPediatricsMotor skillPhysical therapyReflexIntensive care medicineNursingPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Williams syndrome (WS) is a rare genetic disorder that affects multiple body systems and can lead to developmental delays. Early physical therapy intervention may improve neurodevelopment outcomes for newborns with WS. This case report evaluates the impact of physical therapy on the motor and sensory development of a preterm infant with WS following discharge from the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Physical therapy assessments were performed at one, three, and five months of age using the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS). Interventions were individualized to improve muscle strength, reflex integration, and sensory processing, and parents received guidance on home-based activities. Results showed significant growth in weight (from 3460 g to 4900 g) and length (from 51 cm to 60 cm), along with improvements in the head and chest circumference. Motor skills and reflexes, as indicated by AIMS assessments, also demonstrated improvement (p < 0.05). The infant's general health condition also improved, including the frequency and consistency of stools and the success of feeding. This case report demonstrates the effectiveness of physical therapy in improving the motor and sensory development of a newborn with WS syndrome. The combination of individualized techniques and a cooperative environment between health professionals and parents was key to the success of the intervention. Further research is needed to confirm these findings and to determine the long-term effects of early intervention on the development and well-being of these individuals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.453
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicWilliams Syndrome ResearchFrench-language works237,207