ArticleBMC pediatrics2026
"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".
Article in BMC pediatrics, 2026. 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.
- Equitable access to cerebral palsy assessments and diagnosis through an early detection Hub: a feasibility study.Pediatric research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHigh-risk infants, particularly those with Cerebral Palsy (CP), face major challenges. Early identification of CP is crucial to reducing the disease burden and initiating early intervention. The General Movement Assessment (GMA) is a gold-standard assessment that is cost-effective, non-invasive, and highly reliable. However, translation into clinical practice remains challenging in low-resource settings. AIMS AND
objectiveTo implement GMA for at least 80% of the eligible infants accessing the High-Risk Neonatal Follow-up clinic (HRNFC) and assess its contribution to the follow-up rates.
methodThis study was conducted in HRNFC from July 2024 to March 2025 and is ongoing. After counselling and consent, eligible infants (37–43 weeks and 9–20 weeks of corrected gestational age (CGA) were enrolled. GMA standard videos were taken, stored securely, and reported by 2 certified assessors, then shared with parents. Infants with absent/ abnormal fidgety were referred for multidisciplinary team (MDT) evaluation.
result188 infants were enrolled, and 252 GMA videos were recorded. Since August 2024, GMA enrolment sustained at 80%. 16 infants were identified with absent/ abnormal fidgety movements, and 12(75%) of them accessed MDT services before 5 months of CGA. Follow-up rates improved at 40 weeks (58%-65%; p = 0.1736) and at 3 months (30%-41%; p = 0.0422). 75% of infants accessed MDT before 5 months of CGA (p = 0.0001).
conclusionGMA was successfully implemented and sustained as part of routine HRNFC. The majority (75%) of the identified infants who were abnormal were enrolled in MDT services before 5 months, with improved follow-up continuity and access to early intervention. The GMA corner setup demonstrates a high cost benefit.
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.