Observational studyPediatric neurology2026
Reliability of the Telehealth Hammersmith Infant Neurological Examination at 24 Months: A Prospective Counterbalanced Observational Study.
Observational study in Pediatric neurology, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Hammersmith Infant Neurological Examination (HINE) is a standardized assessment used in high-risk infant follow-up to monitor neurodevelopmental concerns. Access barriers have accelerated telehealth use despite the absence of validation for remote HINE administration. This study evaluated reliability and clinical agreement of protocolized telehealth HINE compared with in-person assessment in term-born children aged 22-24 months.
methodsUsing a counterbalanced within-subjects design, 65 children completed two same-day HINE assessments in randomized order: in-person examination performed by a certified examiner (parents absent for blinding), and telehealth examination where a different examiner remotely guided the parent via videoconferencing while scoring in real time. Examiners were blinded to each other's scores. Agreement was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman analysis, with a priori acceptable disagreement defined as ≤7.8 points (≤10% maximum score). Preservation of clinical classifications (total HINE ≤65; asymmetry ≥4) was evaluated.
resultsMean differences in total, domain, and asymmetry scores were below the prespecified threshold, with minimal bias (-0.15 points) and no difference in total score exceeding six points. Total score reliability was acceptable (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.68) despite restricted variance (mean 75.0, S.D. 3.4; maximum 78). Both modalities preserved clinical classification, identifying the same children with total HINE ≤65 and asymmetry ≥4.
conclusionsTelehealth HINE with real-time expert guidance demonstrates clinically acceptable agreement for neurologic surveillance at 24 months in term-born children when in-person follow-up is limited. Validation in younger, higher-risk cohorts with greater score variability is needed before broader diagnostic or triage use.
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.