ArticleAnnals of rehabilitation medicine2017
The Validity of the Bayley-III and DDST-II in Preterm Infants With Neurodevelopmental Impairment: A Pilot Study.
Article in Annals of rehabilitation medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neurodevelopmental outcomes in children with transient hypothyroxinemia of prematurity assessed using the Denver Developmental Screening Test II (DDST-II).Archives of endocrinology and metabolism · 2026Observational
- South Indian Children's Neurodevelopmental Outcomes After Group B Streptococcus Invasive Disease: A Matched-Cohort Study.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2022Article
- Novel two-tiered developmental screening programme for Singaporean toddlers: a quality improvement report.BMJ open quality · 2021Article
- Phenotypic and Imaging Spectrum Associated With WDR45.Pediatric neurology · 2020Article
- Developmental Outcomes of Aicardi Goutières Syndrome.Journal of child neurology · 2020Article
- Validity of the Korean Developmental Screening Test for very-low-birth-weight infants.Korean journal of pediatrics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo identify the usefulness of both the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, 3rd edition (Bayley-III) and Denver Developmental Screening Test II (DDST-II) in preterm babies with neurodevelopmental impairment, considering the detection rate as regulation of criteria.
methodsRetrospective medical chart reviews which included the Bayley-III and DDST-II, were conducted for 69 preterm babies. Detection rate of neurodevelopmental impairment in preterm babies were investigated by modulating scaled score of the Bayley-III. The detection rate of DDST-II was identified by regarding more than 1 caution as an abnormality. Then detection rates of each corrected age group were verified using conventional criteria.
resultsWhen applying conventional criteria, 22 infants and 35 infants were detected as preterm babies with neurodevelopmental impairment, as per the Bayley-III and DDST-II evaluation, respectively. Detection rates increased by applying abnormal criteria that specified as less than 11 points in the Bayley-III scaled score. In DDST-II, detection rates rose from 50% to 68.6% using modified criteria. The detection rates were highest when performed after 12 months corrected age, being 100% in DDST II. The detection rate also increased when applying the modified criteria in both the Bayley-III and DDST-II.
conclusionAccurate neurologic examination is more important for detection of preterm babies with neurodevelopmental impairment. We suggest further studies for the accurate modification of the detection criteria in DDST-II and the Bayley-III for preterm babies.
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.