ArticleBrain and behavior2026
Effects of Safe Early Intervention Approach: A 3-Year Follow-Up.
Article in Brain and behavior, 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
purposeEarly intervention improves developmental outcomes in infants at risk. The SAFE early intervention approach has been found to be effective across multiple developmental domains. The aim of this study was to comparatively report the 3-year follow-up outcomes of the SAFE early intervention approach.
methodsThe study included children aged 2 and 3 years who had been identified as being at neurodevelopmental risk during early infancy and had received either the SAFE early intervention approach or a Neurodevelopmental Treatment (NDT)-based intervention. This follow-up study was based on a doctoral dissertation that originally enrolled 41 infants. At follow-up, 22 children were assessed at 2 years of age (13 SAFE, 9 NDT) and 19 children at 3 years of age (11 SAFE, 8 NDT). Development was evaluated using the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition (Bayley-III), and sensory processing was assessed using Dunn's Sensory Profile (7-36 months). Longitudinal changes in Bayley-III composite scores were analyzed using two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance following multiple imputation for missing data, while sensory processing outcomes were compared cross-sectionally.
resultsCognitive and language composite scores improved significantly from 2 to 3 years of age in both the SAFE and NDT groups (p < 0.05), whereas no significant change was observed in motor composite scores. No significant between-group differences were identified in cognitive, language, or motor composite scores at either assessment point, and no significant group × time interactions were found for any Bayley-III composite score (p > 0.05). Cross-sectional analyses of sensory processing revealed significant differences in selected domains in favor of the SAFE group at both 2 and 3 years of age (p < 0.05).
conclusionBoth the SAFE and NDT approaches supported developmental progress over time. Although no differences were observed in developmental trajectories between the groups, the SAFE approach showed potential advantages in selected aspects of sensory processing. Further studies with larger samples and longer follow-up periods are needed to confirm these findings.
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.