ArticlePediatric research2020
Neurodevelopmental outcome of preterm twins at 5 years of age.
Article in Pediatric research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Severe neonatal complications and long-term health-related quality of life in very preterm and/or very low birth weight survivors: evidence from the Dutch Project on preterm and small for gestational age cohort.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Article
- Prevalence and determinants of suspected developmental delays among 12-month-old children in northeast of Iran: a large-scale population-based study.BMJ paediatrics open · 2024Article
- Association of perinatal factors with suspected developmental delay in urban children aged 1-36 months - a large-scale cross-sectional study in China.BMC pediatrics · 2023Article
- To be born twin: effects on long-term neurodevelopment of very preterm infants-a cohort study.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTwins are considered to be at an increased risk for perinatal mortality and morbidities, but it is unclear whether preterm twins are at an increased risk for poor developmental outcomes when compared to preterm singletons. Our aim was to compare the neurodevelopmental outcome of preterm twins vs singletons at 5 years of age.
methodsVery low birth weight and very low gestational age infants (twins n = 66, singletons n = 157) were recruited as a part of the PIPARI project in the Turku University Hospital, covering a regional population. Cognitive development, neuropsychological performance, and neurodevelopmental impairments (including cerebral palsy, hearing deficit, visual impairment, and intellectual disability) were evaluated at 5 years of age.
resultsTwins and singletons had otherwise similar perinatal background factors, except for the higher proportion of preterm rupture of membranes in singletons. Twins had cognitive and neuropsychological outcomes that were otherwise comparable with singletons, but they had a slightly lower verbal intelligence quotient (estimate -5.81, 95% CI -11.14 to -0.48, p = 0.03). Being a twin was not a risk for neurodevelopmental impairments.
conclusionsOur study shows that, contrary to a common hypothesis, the overall neurodevelopment of very preterm twins does not significantly differ from that of preterm singletons.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31830757What 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.