ArticleBMJ paediatrics open2025
Early detection of cerebral palsy among a high-risk cohort in Bangladesh.
Article in BMJ paediatrics open, 2025. 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.
- Reliability of the Telehealth Hammersmith Infant Neurological Examination at 24 Months: A Prospective Counterbalanced Observational Study.Pediatric neurology · 2026Observational
- Early neurological and developmental trajectories of infants at high risk of cerebral palsy in Bangladesh: a prospective longitudinal cohort study.BMJ paediatrics open · 2026Article
- "Implementation of general movements assessment for early detection and treatment of infants at-risk of cerebral palsy - translating evidence into practice in a low resource setting".BMC pediatrics · 2026Article
- Early intervention in cerebral palsy 1.0-3.0: From passive approaches to precision, context-responsive care.Science progressReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the predictive validity of best practice early detection tools for cerebral palsy (CP) in a high-risk cohort. STUDY
designProspective longitudinal cohort study.
settingNeonatal intensive care unit of a regional tertiary hospital in Bangladesh.
participantsNeonates with risk factors for CP admitted to Mymensingh Medical College Hospital Neonatal Intensive Care Unit between November 2019 and March 2020. OUTCOME MEASURES: General Movements Assessment (GMA) at writhing and fidgety periods; Hammersmith Infant Neurological Examination (HINE) and Peabody Developmental Motor Scales Second Edition (PDMS-2) conducted in person at 3, 12 and 24 months. The Developmental Assessment of Young Children (DAYC-2), Ages and Stages Questionnaire (ASQ-3) and Developmental Milestones Chart (DMC) were administered remotely at 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 months. Due to the impact of COVID-19, a proportion of the cohort was not able to have GMA fidgety videos completed and the first HINE assessment was delayed.
resultsA total of 227 infants were enrolled. Of the surviving infants assessed at 24 months, 36 (29%) had a confirmed diagnosis of CP. The most accurate combination of tools for early detection was GMA and HINE at 3 months (sensitivity 0.91; specificity 1.00). The PDMS-2 Total Motor Quotient, with an optimised cut-off of 59, showed high accuracy at 24 months (sensitivity 0.94; specificity 0.99). Among the tools administered remotely, the DAYC-2 PD, DMC (Gross and Fine Motor domains) and ASQ-3 (Gross and Fine Motor domains) demonstrated strong predictive validity-both individually and in combination-at 9, 12, 18 and 24 months, supporting their use as practical alternatives when in-person assessments are not feasible.
conclusionsDespite pandemic-related disruptions, an accurate diagnosis was possible as early as 3 months of age using the best practice tools. Our findings support the practicability of scalable early detection models integrating in-person and remote assessments to improve access to timely diagnosis.
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.