ArticleBMC pediatrics2025
Neurodevelopmental outcomes and predictors among late preterm infants: a 6-month prospective cohort study.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLate preterm infants (33-36 weeks gestation) are at increased risk for neurodevelopmental delays, but early signs often go unrecognized due to subtle presentations and inconsistent follow-up. While screening tools are available, few studies have examined how well parents identify developmental concerns compared to trained professionals.
aimTo evaluate neurodevelopmental outcomes in late preterm infants at 3 and 6 months of corrected age by comparing parental and therapist-reported developmental scores, and to identify predictors influencing developmental scores.
methodsSixty late preterm infants were screened using the Trivandrum Developmental Screening Tool (TDST) at discharge and followed up at 3 and 6 months of corrected age. Both therapists and parents completed the TDST independently during follow-up. Developmental scores were compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Regression analyses were conducted to identify predictors that influence parent and therapist scoring. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
resultsAt 3 months there is no significant difference between the parent and therapist TDST overall scores, while at 6 months, therapist and parent TDST overall scores showed significant difference (p < 0.001). Regression analysis identified rolling and object transfer as strong predictors of overall scores for both parent and therapist scores at 6 months.
conclusionsDespite similar overall scores at 3 months, significant discrepancies between parent and therapist scoring emerged by 6 months. These findings emphasise the importance of caregiver education in early neurodevelopmental surveillance.
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.