ArticlePediatric research2026
Assessing infant motor development from afar: reflections on remote assessment of infant motor development.
Article in Pediatric research, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated a global shift from face-to-face to digital healthcare, increasing demand for valid and reliable tools that can be administered remotely. The Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) is a widely used observational measure of infant gross motor development, yet evidence supporting its psychometric performance via telehealth remains limited. This study evaluated the validity of remote AIMS administration across three digital modalities compared with traditional in-person assessment. Findings demonstrated excellent agreement between remote and face-to-face scores, confirming that virtual administration provides clinically reliable information about infant motor development. Validating the AIMS for telehealth has substantial implications for equity, research, and clinical practice. Remote delivery reduces travel, cost, and logistical barriers, improving access to early developmental assessment for families in rural, remote, or low-socioeconomic contexts. Reliable remote assessment also enables broader research participation and supports hybrid clinical models that maintain continuity of care when in-person visits are not feasible. These results strengthen confidence in digital modes of assessment and highlight remote AIMS administration as a viable, scalable approach to early developmental surveillance. The findings offer particular benefit for infants who face the greatest barriers to timely evaluation and intervention. IMPACT: Strengthens confidence in telehealth as a legitimate and scalable mode of early motor surveillance, especially for infants at risk of delay. Expands opportunities for equitable access by enabling high-quality assessment for families in rural, remote, or low-resource settings with barriers to in-person services. Supports inclusive and decentralised research models, enabling broader recruitment, reduced participant burden, and improved monitoring in clinical trials and developmental follow-up.
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.