MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416403461 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-20448-1

A study protocol exploring synchrony between mother infant and therapist during shared reading with preterm infants in a neonatal unit

2025· article· en· W4416403461 on OpenAlexaff
Benarous Xavier, Mariana Charlotte, Scoury Daphné, Crovetto Cecile, G. Kongolo, Fabrice Wallois, James Bonaiuto, Holly Rayson, Sylvie Viaux‐Savelon

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Psychological interventionReading (process)Neonatal intensive care unitProtocol (science)Shared readingKangaroo care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early parent-infant interactions are crucial for socio-emotional development; however, interventions to enhance these interactions in the context of prematurity remain underexplored. This study aims to explore the effects of shared reading on mother-preterm infant synchrony. A single-center pre-post study will be conducted at Amiens University Hospital, involving 20 preterm infants (at birth between 25 and 33 GW and at inclusion between 34 and 36 GW) and their mothers. Synchrony will be assessed at multiple levels-hormonal, physiological, behavioral, and psychological-during interactive and non-interactive periods. We hypothesize that shared reading sessions enhance physiological synchrony during interactive periods compared with non-interactive periods. Additionally, we expect post-intervention increases in oxytocin and vasopressin levels, with greater behavioral synchrony during reading sessions. Psychological synchrony will be determined through correlations between empathic moments identified by observers and increased physiological and behavioral synchrony. The findings could inform neonatal care practices, emphasizing the importance of early targeted interventions to enhance parent-infant bonding and improve developmental outcomes.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.006

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicInfant Development and Preterm Care→French-language works237,207→