MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7154601911 · doi:10.48448/s938-fq62

EEG Delta-Beta Coupling in 2-year-old Offspring of Pregnant Persons Receiving a Diet-and-Exercise Intervention: A Randomized Controlled Trial Follow-up

2025· other· W7154601911 on OpenAlexaff
Cognitive Science Society 2025, John Krzeczkowski, Ryan Van Lieshout, Kian Yousefi Kousha

Bibliographic record

VenueUnderline Science Inc. · 2025
Typeother
Language
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOffspringdBcPregnancyElectroencephalographyRandomized controlled trialYoung adultCoupling (piping)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Delta-beta coupling (DBC) is a neural marker of emotion regulation (ER), with elevated DBC linked to cortical over-processing of emotional stimuli. This study investigates the effects of the Be Healthy in Pregnancy (BHIP) intervention, combining a high-protein, energy-controlled diet, nutrition counseling, and physical activity, on offspring DBC. Methods: Pregnant individuals received either the BHIP intervention or usual care. Twenty-four offspring at follow-up completed resting-state EEG at age two using a 128-channel system. DBC was quantified as the correlation coefficient between delta (2–4Hz) and beta (13–30Hz) power across epochs. Group differences were analyzed using Fisher’s Z-tests. Results: BHIP offspring exhibited significantly lower DBC in frontal (p=.017), central (p=.014), and parietal (p=.009) regions compared to controls. Conclusion: Reduced DBC reflects a neural profile linked to efficient ER, enabling context-appropriate cognitive resource allocation. These findings suggest prenatal diet and exercise potentially modulate neurodevelopment, warranting validation in larger, more diverse cohorts.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueUnderline Science Inc.French-language works237,207