ArticleEarly human development2020
Neonatal feeding performance is related to feeding outcomes in childhood.
Article in Early human development, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhancing the assessment of deglutition function in preterm infants with mechano-acoustic analysis and machine learning: a narrative review.Perspectives of the ASHA special interest groups · 2026Article
- Feeding challenges in early infancy: the role of reflexes, muscle tone, and developmental milestones.PeerJ · 2025Observational
- Relationships between preterm medical factors and feeding behaviors at term-equivalent age.Early human development · 2024Article
- A Unique Clinical Tool for the Evaluation of Oral Feeding Skills in Infants.Canadian journal of occupational therapy. Revue canadienne d'ergotherapie · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimDefine relationships of early feeding performance with feeding outcomes in childhood, while assessing the predictive validity of the Neonatal Eating Outcome Assessment. STUDY
designNinety-one infants (44 preterm infants born ≤32 weeks at term-equivalent age and 47 full-term infants within 4 days of life) had feeding evaluated using the Neonatal Eating Outcome Assessment and the Neonatal Oral Motor Assessment Scale (NOMAS). At 4 years of age, 39 of these infants (22 preterm infants and 17 full-term infants; 43% follow-up rate) had parent-report measures of feeding conducted using the Behavioral Pediatrics Feeding Assessment Scale (BPFAS) and Pediatric Eating Assessment Tool (PediEAT).
resultsLower Neonatal Eating Outcome Assessment scores were related to higher PediEAT scores (p = 0.01; r = -0.44), but were not related to BPFAS scores (p = 0.17; r = -0.23). Relationships were not detected between the NOMAS and BPFAS (p = 0.35; r = 0.17), and relationships between the NOMAS and PediEAT failed to reach significance (p = 0.06; r = 0.34). There was a relationship between the BPFAS and PediEAT scores at 4 years (p < 0.001; r = 0.66). Preterm infants performed poorer than full-term infants on the Neonatal Eating Outcome Assessment (p < 0.001) and NOMAS (p < 0.001), but no differences were detected in preterm compared to full-term performance on the BPFAS (p = 0.87) and PediEAT scores (p = 0.27). DISCUSSION: Neonatal feeding performance is an important predictor of feeding outcomes at 4 years of age. The Neonatal Eating Outcome Assessment has predictive validity, and the Pediatric Eating Assessment Tool has concurrent validity with relationships to another childhood feeding tool.
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.