Epigenetic age and neurodevelopmental outcomes in children born preterm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The objective of this study was to identify predictors of epigenetic age and its association with neurodevelopmental outcomes in children born preterm. Methods: A prospective cohort of children born 24-to-32-weeks gestation, well characterized with clinical data, brain imaging, and neurodevelopmental assessments at 3 years (Bayley-III cognitive and motor composite), were included. Epigenetic age (in weeks) was determined using the Pediatric Buccal Epigenetic Clock and corrected for chronological age to give epigenetic age difference (EAD). The associations between EAD, clinical risk factors and neurodevelopmental outcomes were examined using multivariable linear regression. Results: = .001) scores at 3 years, with a higher EAD (epigenetic age acceleration) being associated with better outcomes. Conclusion: Epigenetic age acceleration was associated with better cognitive and motor outcomes in children born preterm. Epigenetic modification is an important biological mechanism that contributes to the variability in neurodevelopmental outcomes in the preterm population.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".