ArticleJournal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS2013
Motor contingency learning and infants with Spina Bifida.
Article in Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06560788 (Chiari II Brain Malformation), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Chiari II Brain Malformation: The Role of Cerebrospinal Fluid in Neurodevelopmental Defects Associated With Spina Bifida
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- A quarter century of research on infant contingency learning: Current and future directions.Infant behavior & development · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence detects awareness of functional relation with the environment in 3 month old babies.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Weight Status of Children Participating in the National Spina Bifida Patient Registry.Pediatrics · 2022Article
- Pediatric Spina Bifida and Spinal Cord Injury.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Vagal tone during infant contingency learning and its disruption.Developmental psychobiology · 2016Article
- Spina bifida.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2015Review
- Neuropsychological care guidelines for people with spina bifida.Journal of pediatric rehabilitation medicineReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Infants with Spina Bifida (SB) were compared to typically developing infants (TD) using a conjugate reinforcement paradigm at 6 months-of-age (n = 98) to evaluate learning, and retention of a sensory-motor contingency. Analyses evaluated infant arm-waving rates at baseline (wrist not tethered to mobile), during acquisition of the sensory-motor contingency (wrist tethered), and immediately after the acquisition phase and then after a delay (wrist not tethered), controlling for arm reaching ability, gestational age, and socioeconomic status. Although both groups responded to the contingency with increased arm-waving from baseline to acquisition, 15% to 29% fewer infants with SB than TD were found to learn the contingency depending on the criterion used to determine contingency learning. In addition, infants with SB who had learned the contingency had more difficulty retaining the contingency over time when sensory feedback was absent. The findings suggest that infants with SB do not learn motor contingencies as easily or at the same rate as TD infants, and are more likely to decrease motor responses when sensory feedback is absent. Results are discussed with reference to research on contingency learning in infants with and without neurodevelopmental disorders, and with reference to motor learning in school-age children with SB.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.