ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2025
Differential item functioning in neonatal behavioral neurological assessment in high-risk full-term infants in NICU based on a machine learning approach.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: This study adopted Rasch Analysis to evaluate the psychometric properties of the neonatal behavioral neurological assessment (NBNA) in high-risk full-term infants during their NICU stay. Methods: A total of 543 full-term infants (14.26 ± 7.02 days of age) were included in the study. We used the Rasch Model (RM) to assess the reliability and validity of the NBNA and GPCMlasso models to examine differential item functioning (DIF). Results: The samples responded to the NBNA according to the Rasch Model pattern. We found that the NBNA measures neurobehavior with one extra component regarding visual reactions. We found items that displayed disorder category functions in the NBNA. Conservatively, we found that the participants' responses to the NBNA items were mostly dependent on the neurological developmental level, regardless of demographic traits. Conclusion: Our results support the applicability of the NBNA in depicting neurobehaviors in high-risk full-term infants in NICU. We found that high-risk infants could respond to NBNA items that were mostly dependent on the neural developmental level. The category functioning analysis revealed that the items provided inaccurate information owing to the disordered rating design.
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.