Anthropometric indicators of nutritional status and growth in very low birth-weight premature infants hospitalized in a neonatal intensive care unit

Background: Anthropometric indicators are difficult to interpret in very low birth weight (VLBW) premature infants, including both appropriate for gestational age (AGA) and small for gestational age (SGA) infants. Therefore, the purpose was to describe the anthropometric indicators of growth and nutritional status in VLBW premature infants AGA and SGA, hospitalized in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Study design: The descriptive and prospective study design included 114 preterm infants, adequate for gestational age/small for gestational age hospitalized in the intensive care unit. Head, thigh, mid upper arm circumference, skin-fold measurements and weight/age, length/ age, and weight/length indices were obtained. Correlations were made among the anthropometric indices, and a multivariate regression analysis with weight/age as dependent variable was performed. Results: Weight/age in AGA premature infants had high number of significant anthropometric correlations. The SGA premature infants had few and weak correlations. The regression analysis showed that anthropometric indices better explain changes in the weight/age index in adequate for gestational age premature infants. Conclusion: Weight/age in the VLBW/AGA premature infants could reflect growth, nutritional status and energy stored as fat, but in the VLBW/SGA premature infants, thigh circumference and mid arm circumference would be better indicators just of nutritional status.

Unpacking insanity defence standards: an experimental study of rationality and control tests in criminal law

The present study investigated the impact of different legal standards on mock juror decisions concerning whether a defendant was guilty or not guilty by reason of insanity. Undergraduate students (N = 477) read a simulated case summary involving a murder case and were asked to make an insanity determination. The cases differed in terms of the condition of the defendant (rationality deficit or control deficit) and the legal standard given to the jurors to make the determination (Model Penal Code, McNaughten or McNaughten plus a separate control determination). The effects of these variables on the insanity determination were investigated. Jurors also completed questionnaires measuring individualism and hierarchy attitudes and perceptions of facts in the case. Results indicate that under current insanity standards jurors do not distinguish between defendants with rationality deficits and defendants with control deficits regardless of whether the legal standard requires them to do so. Even defendants who lacked control were found guilty at equal rates under a legal standard excusing rationality deficits only and a legal standard excluding control and rationality deficits. This was improved by adding a control test as a partial defence, to be determined after a rationality determination. Implications for the insanity defence in the Criminal Justice System are discussed.