ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2025
Application of the neonatal 'floppy module' to older infants: can it be used for differential diagnosis?
Article in European journal of pediatrics, 2025. 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.
- From unexplained hypotonia to screen-positive spinal muscular atrophy: why standardized clinical assessment matters.European journal of pediatrics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study we applied the 'floppy module', originally developed for newborns with hypotonia, to older infants in order to establish the range of findings in both low-risk infants and in those with hypotonia due to different etiologies. Data were collected from 413 assessments obtained in 159 low-risk infants assessed at different ages between the age of 3 and 24 months. The distribution of findings in the low-risk infants was similar to the data previously obtained in low-risk newborns, with all assessments having optimal findings (column 3) on all items. The only item with a small number of findings outside column 3 was tendon reflexes. The module was also applied to a cohort of 57 infants with hypotonia older than 3 months in order to identify individual items that may be useful in differential diagnosis. Items assessing antigravity movements were the most sensitive to identify neuromuscular disorders. Dysmorphic features and other organ involvement were most suggestive of genetic disorder, while seizures were a reliable indicator of CNS involvement.
conclusionOur findings suggest that the neonatal floppy module can be reliably administered also in infants from the age of 3 months. The pilot application of the module in infants with hypotonia from the age of 3 months also suggested that the module could be used to help the clinician in the differential diagnosis of infants with hypotonia. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Hypotonia is a relatively common finding in the neonatal period and can be due to multiple causes. • As hypotonia can be observed also after the neonatal period and clinicians often face the challenge of differential diagnosis, the question has arisen whether the 'floppy module' validated in newborns could also be used in infants. WHAT IS NEW: • Most of the infants with hypotonia, between the age of 3 to 24 months, have a diagnosis of neuromuscular disorders. • Most of the infants with CNS involvement and with genetic diagnosis, who may have shown hypotonia in the neonatal period, by 6 to 12 months have normal or increased tone.
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.