ArticlemHealth2024
Feasibility and reliability to assess the motor development of infants exposed to gestational COVID-19 using the Alberta Infant Motor Scale remotely.
Article in mHealth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Hammersmith Infant Neurological Examination at 3 Months in Infants at Risk for Congenital Infections: A Cohort Study.Journal of paediatrics and child health · 2026Observational
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The virus infection severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during pregnancy is a risk factor for developmental problems. Our objectives were to explore feasibility measures and verify the reliability of synchronously employing the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) remotely in infants with prenatal exposure to SARS-CoV-2. Additionally, we explored the motor performance of these infants relative to an unexposed normative sample. An exploratory cross-sectional study was carried out and included 20 infants (10.65±4.99 months) whose mothers tested positive for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during pregnancy. Infants were assessed with the AIMS remotely and synchronously via video call by a physical therapist. The calls were recorded. Three independent observers scored the recordings. Parents and assessors answered questions regarding barriers to and facilities for the assessments. A higher proportion of parents (90%) found it easy to understand and replicate the commands provided by the therapist during the assessment (P<0.001). The assessors reported not encountering difficulty in most assessments. Interobserver reliability was good in the standing posture [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.734-0.942, P<0.001] and excellent (95% CI: 0.970-0.996, P<0.001) in prone, supine, and sitting. Intra-rater reliability was excellent (95% CI's: 0.876-1.000, P's<0.001) in all postures. There were no differences between the motor performance of exposed infants compared to the unexposed normative sample. It was feasible to assess the motor performance of infants exposed to SARS-CoV-2 via video call with good to excellent inter- and intra-rater reliabilities, making it an important approach when social distancing is needed.
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.