The pattern and rhythm of motor skills acquisition of healthy preterm infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research aimed to point out and identify the pattern and the rhythm of motor development of a group of healthy Brazilian preterm infants during de first year of corrected age, as well as, to compare these aspects through a healthy Brazilian infant group borned fullterm and with normative data of the instruments used through the Test Infant Motor Performance TIMP and the Alberta Infant Motor Scale AIMS. In this way, two studies were elaborated: in the first study, twelve preterm infants participated, (MD=33,6 GA , ± 1,25) and ten fullterm infants (MD=39,1 GA , ± 0,73). This infants was assessed with the TIMP once a month (0 - 4), in their home environments. The motor performance increased in both groups, verifying the variability in the total scores in all the ages. The preterm group showed rhythm of motor acquisition higher from 0 to 1 than 3 to 4 months (p= 0,016). Based on the results, it was possible to conclude that the healthy preterm infants, with gestational age bigger than 32 weeks, showed a pattern of acquisition of the motor skills similar to the typical infants when related to the sequence, but with an own rhythm of acquisition, which is possible to consider like a variation at the spectrum of normality. At the second study, thirteen preterm infants participated, (MD=33,5 GA weeks, ± 1,33) and fifteen fullterm infants (MD=39,1 GA weeks, ± 0,65). This infants was assessed with the TIMP at 0 4 months and with the AIMS at 6, 9 and 12 months of age, in their home environments. The preterm group showed a superior intermediate score compared to the fullterm group from 6 (p=0,03) to 12 (p=0,006) months. It was evidenced, at the first four months, that there was a higher acquisition through the interval from 2 to 3 months related to the others intervals (1-2 and 2-3 p=0,05; 2-3 and 3-4 p=0,01). At the second semester, the interval from 6 to 9 months showed a bigger acquisition in both groups (preterm, p= 0, 001 and fullterm, p=0,03). Both of them showed inferior performance contrasted to the amounts established by the TIMP at the first month (preterm, p < 0,008 and fullterm, p < 0,001) and only the fullterm group at the second month (p = 0,005). Related to the second semester, the preterm group presented superior amounts compared to the amount of 50% at the AIMS during all the months, meanwhile, only at the 12 month this difference was significant (p= 0,003). The results showed peculiar characteristics related to the rhythm of motor skills acquisition during the first year of corrected age, and the motor development quality, showed at the third month, can be used like an indication to future deficit motors. It is suggested that the interventions should be initiated as soon as possible, in a way that makes possible to benefit from those observed moments a higher predisposition to the acquisition of motor skills (from 2 to 3 and form 6 to 9 months).
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".