Relationship between postural control and oral skills of preterm infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to verify the relationship of postural control and oral skills. The mixed longitudinal study, consisted of 43 children ages 4, 6 and 9 months of corrected age, a total of 80 ratings. The positions of prone, supine, sitting and standing, were evaluated according to the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS). The sitting and prone were classified as appropriate and not appropriate for the ages assessed in accordance with the senior representative of each position of the AIMS, which demonstrated the month in which 90% of children had each position. The development of oral skills was through the movement of lips, tongue and jaw during bottle-feeding / breast withdrawal pasty the spoon, the use of the cup and biscuits. The planes of movement, sagittal, frontal and transverse behavior were analyzed in the postural and oral skills. All evaluations were videotaped and analyzed by 3 physiotherapists and speech therapists 3. The parents answered a questionnaire with closed questions on eating behavior and attitudes usual, the child during the day. Later, there was a statistical analysis to test interrater reliability, Fisher's test to verify the relationship between postural control and oral skills and Kruskal-Wallis test for comparison between ages. The motor development was late, especially at 4 and 6 months and an evolution from the sixth month. In analyzing the survey, found that no family had the habit of placing the child in a prone position. Most parents are not encouraged to sit at 6 months, while at 9 months, most children were encouraged in this position. In relation to oral skills, some of them were not complete in all children, like, lip seal, lip pressure, lateralization of language and rotation of tongue and jaw. However, there was a progressive development of these movements over the months. In analyzing the data of postural control and oral skills has not been verified relationship between them, because the movements of the oral structures were more developed than postural control.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".