Neurodevelopment in the first year of children exposed to SARS-CoV-2 during intrauterine period: systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify, in the literature, the implications of gestational exposure to SARS-CoV-2 on neurodevelopment in the first postnatal year, focusing on changes in the motor, personal-social, socio-emotional, and communication and language domains. METHOD: Systematic review with narrative synthesis, considering neurodevelopmental outcomes, categorized according to gross and fine motor skills, personal-social interaction, socio-emotional aspects, and communication and language. Searches were conducted in PubMed, LILACS/BIREME, and EMBASE databases between January 2020 and June 2023. Two independent researchers performed selection by reading the title and abstract and applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Cohort studies that evaluated children up to one year old, exposed to SARS-CoV-2 in utero, were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess methodological quality. RESULTS: Seventeen articles were included, with methodological quality ranging from intermediate to good. The most frequently used instrument to characterize neurodevelopment was the Ages & Stages Questionnaires. Infants aged 0 to 3 months had lower scores for fine and gross motor skills. Infants aged 3 to 12 months had more fine motor, social and communication and language impairments. CONCLUSION: Most infants exposed to SARS-CoV-2 showed development as expected, however delays were identified in the motor, personal-social, socio-emotional and communication and language domains according to the age group.
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 | 0.004 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".