ArticlePloS one2021
Reaching skills in six-month-old infants at environmental and biological risk.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association between Contextual Factors and Affordances in the Home Environment of Infants Exposed to Poverty.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Parental Practices and Environmental Differences among Infants Living in Upper-Middle and High-Income Countries: A Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess kinematic parameters and proximal and distal reaching adjustments of infants at biological or environmental risk and compare with reaching performance of six-month-old full-term infants without known risk factors.
methodsThis blinded cross-sectional study included 62 infants at six months of age divided into three independent groups: Group with no known risk factor (NRF), 28 full-terms with no risk factors; Low SES group (LSES):19 full-terms classified as low socioeconomic status and no biological risk; Very preterm group (VPT), 15 very preterm infants at six months corrected age and no environmental risk. Infants were placed in a reclined baby chair at 45°, and a malleable and unfamiliar object was presented to the infant at 5-second intervals to elicit reaching movements.
resultsInfants from LSES presented reaching duration (p = 0.032, Cohen's f = 0.349) and movement unit (p = 0.033, Cohen's f = 0.351) significantly higher than VPT group. Horizontal hand orientation was moderately associated with infants at environmental risk (p = 0.031; Cramer's V = 0.30).
conclusionInfants of low socioeconomic status perform less functional reaching movements than very preterm infants at six months corrected age. Socioeconomic status may impact more on reaching skills than biological risk. Given the importance of reaching for infant development, low-cost public health strategies are needed to identify possible delays.
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.