ArticlePloS one2024
Prechtl's method to assess general movements: Inter-rater reliability during the preterm period.
Article in PloS one, 2024. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Consensus operational definitions of surgical meta-competencies for computer vision-driven performance assessment: a multi-institutional Delphi study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- [Dynamic changes in regional cerebral oxygen saturation variability within the first week after birth and relationship with brain injury type in preterm infants].Zhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics · 2026Article
- Current Knowledge of Neonatal Birth Asphyxia - a Review of Recent Literature and Novel Approach.Maedica · 2025Review
- A systematic review of portable technologies for the early assessment of motor development in infants.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
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 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPrechtl's method (GMA) is a test for the functional assessment of the young nervous system. It involves a global and a detailed assessment of the general movements (GMs) and has demonstrated validity. Data on the reliability of both assessments in the preterm period are scarce. This study aimed to evaluate the inter-rater reliability for the global and detailed assessments of the preterm writhing GMA. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study participants were 69 infants born at <37 gestational weeks and admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit. They were randomly assigned to five pairs of raters. Raters assessed infants' GMs using preterm videos. Outcome variables were (a) the GMs classification (normal versus abnormal; normal versus abnormal subcategories) and (b) the general movements optimality score (GMOS), obtained through the global and detailed assessments. The Gwet's AC1 and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were calculated for the GMs classification and the GMOS, respectively.
resultsThe global assessment presented an AC1 = 0.84 [95% CI = 0.54,1] for the GMs binary classification and an AC1 = 0.67 [95% CI = 0.38,0.89] for the GMs classification with abnormal subcategories. The detailed assessment presented an ICC = 0.72 [95% CI = 0.39,0.90] for the GMOS.
conclusionsInter-rater reliability was high and substantial for the global assessment and good for the detailed assessment. However, the small sample size limited the precision of these estimates. Future research should involve larger samples of preterm infants to improve estimate precision. Challenging items such as assessing the neck and trunk, poor repertoire GMs, and tremulous movements may impact the preterm writhing GMA's inter-rater reliability. Therefore, ongoing training and calibration among raters is necessary. Further investigation in clinical settings can enhance our understanding of the preterm writhing GMA's reliability.
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.