ReviewFrontiers in pediatrics2022
A narrative review of the effect of parent-child shared reading in preterm infants.
Review in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Health promotion through reading in the first thousand days: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ paediatrics open · 2025Pooled it
- Life after the NICU: targeting modifiable factors to improve neurodevelopmental outcomes in children born extremely preterm.Pediatric research · 2026Review
- Environmental exposures in the neonatal intensive care unit impacting neurodevelopmental outcomes for neonates.Pediatric research · 2025Review
- Assessing the Impact of a NICU Book Cart on Staff and Caregiver Speech to Very Preterm Infants.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- A study protocol exploring synchrony between mother infant and therapist during shared reading with preterm infants in a neonatal unit.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Maternal Stress and Child Development: The Moderating Role of Interactive Shared Reading.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Promoting language and literacy through shared book reading in the NICU: A scoping review.PloS one · 2025Article
- Neighbourhood characteristics, lifestyle factors, and child development: Secondary analysis of the All our families cohort study.Frontiers in epidemiology · 2022Article
- Development and reliability of the coding system evaluating maternal sensitivity to social interactions with 34- to 36-week postmenstrual age preterm infants.Frontiers in psychiatry · 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
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The benefits of book-reading interventions on language development in full-term infants have been well investigated. Because children born preterm face a greater risk of cognitive, language and emotional impairments, this narrative review examines the theoretical evidence, empirical findings, and practical challenges for introducing such intervention to this population. The effect of shared book interventions on typically developing infants is mediated by three components: a linguistic aspect (i.e., exposure to enriched linguistic input), an interactive aspect (i.e., eliciting more synchronous and contingent communication), and a parental aspect (i.e., reducing parental stress and increasing sense of control). Parental shared book reading in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) was found to be feasible and well accepted. It provides concrete support for positive parenting in a highly stressful context. Preliminary evidence supports a positive effect of shared reading sessions in physiological parameters of preterm infants in NICU. One study showed that parental shared book reading in an NICU is associated with lower decline in language development during the first 24 months compared to a historical control group. Findings from a community-based birth cohort confirm the positive effect of this intervention on cognitive development with a 2-year-follow up. More structured clinical trials are now needed to confirm these preliminary findings. Questions remain about possible moderators of these interventions, in particular cultural features.
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.