scholarly journals Motor and cognitive outcomes of low birth weight neonates born in a limited resource country: a systematic review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graciane Radaelli ◽  
Eduardo Leal-Conceicao ◽  
felipe kalil ◽  
Melissa Taurisano ◽  
Fernanda Majolo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Birth Weight ◽  
Cognitive Development ◽  
Low Birth Weight ◽  
Motor Development ◽  
Very Low Birth Weight ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Standardized Mean Difference ◽  
Low Birth Weight Children

Objective: To examine the outcomes of motor and cognitive development among neonates born with low birth weight (LBW) or very low birth weight (VLBW). Data sources: Systematic review carried out in PubMed, Cochrane Library and Web of Science using the search strategy using combinations of the following keywords and terms: preterm birth OR prematurity OR premature Infants OR premature children AND low birth weight children OR very low birth weight children AND neurodevelopment OR cognitive development OR Motor development OR follow up AND humans. Articles searched were published from inception until July, 2019, and involved children born and evaluated in Brazil. The bias risk analysis was adapted from the STROBE scale, used to evaluate the methodology of the included studies. Data synthesis: The search identified 2,214 publications. After screening for titles and abstracts and removing duplicate entries, full texts of 38 articles were reviewed. After reading full texts, 24 articles met the inclusion criteria (articles in Portuguese and English), dated from 1998 to 2017). Endnote Version X9 software was used for data extraction. Two reviewers performed the literature search and study selection independently. Disagreements were solved by consensus or by a third reviewer. Results: it was evidenced an inferior motor development of children with LBW when compared to the control population, the standardized mean difference of [-1.15 (95% CI -1.56, -0.73), I2 80%], children with LBW have lower cognitive development according the standardized mean difference of [-0,71 (95% CI -0.99, -0.44) I2 67%]. Conclusion: Our review reinforces that impaired motor and cognitive outcome is a significant long-term outcome associated with LBW. The risk of impairment in those domains increases with decreasing gestational age. Keywords: Motor development; outcome; prematurity; preterm infants; systematic review.

scholarly journals Comparison of Motor Development in Preterm, and Term Children Aged 3 to 7 Years

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Musa Dehghan ◽  
Abdullah Ghasemi ◽  
Ali Kashi ◽  
Elahe Arabameri ◽  
Kayvan Molanorouzi
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Low Birth Weight ◽  
Motor Development ◽  
Low Birthweight ◽  
Very Low Birth Weight ◽  
Average Weight ◽  
Normal Children ◽  
Movement Assessment ◽  
Low Birth Weight Children ◽  
Twin Children

Background: Human development is influenced by genetic, environmental, and social factors whose foundation is formed from infancy and childhood. Preterm birth and low birth weight are important issues that can affect the development and threaten the public health. Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare motor development manipulation, balance, aiming, and receiving in low, very low birth weight, and normal children aged 3 to7 years. Methods: In this comparative study, 63 children were selected from among the preterm infants admitted to NICU ward. They were divided into three groups of (1) low birth weight children (mean 2066 ± 354 g) (n = 30), (2) very low birth weight children (mean 1325 ± 117 g) (n = 13), and (3) preterm twin children (mean 1781 ± 385 g) (n = 20).Also, 15 term children with an average weight (3345 ± 365 g) were selected. To evaluate the motor development of children, the Movement Assessment Battery for Children (Second Edition) (MABC-2) test was used. The results were analyzed by SPSS using one-way ANOVA test (P ≤ 0.05). Results: Low birthweight and very low birthweight children had poorer performance on manipulation, aiming, catching, and balance compared to normal children (P ≤ 0.05). Conclusions: VLBW children performed significantly poorer than LBW and Twin children on the subscales of posting coins, threading beads, drawing trail, one-leg balance, and walking heels raised.

scholarly journals Cognitive Development at Age 8 Years in Very Low Birth Weight Children in Taiwan

2008 ◽  
Vol 107 (12) ◽  
pp. 915-920 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shu-Chi Mu ◽  
Kuo-Su Tsou ◽  
Chyong-Hsin Hsu ◽  
Li-Jung Fang ◽  
Suh-Fang Jeng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Cognitive Development ◽  
Low Birth Weight ◽  
Very Low Birth Weight ◽  
Low Birth Weight Children

Patterns of Cognitive Development in Very Low Birth Weight Children During the First Six Years of Life

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 99 (3) ◽  
pp. 383-389 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Koller ◽  
K. Lawson ◽  
S. A. Rose ◽  
I. Wallace ◽  
C. McCarton
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Cognitive Development ◽  
Low Birth Weight ◽  
Very Low Birth Weight ◽  
Low Birth Weight Children

Effects of Biological and Social Factors on the Cognitive Development of Very Low Birth Weight Children

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 92 (5) ◽  
pp. 658-665 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nynke Weisglas-Kuperus ◽  
Wim Baerts ◽  
Mila Smrkovsky ◽  
Pieter J.J. Sauer
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Cognitive Development ◽  
Low Birth Weight ◽  
Home Environment ◽  
Social Factors ◽  
Very Low Birth Weight ◽  
Stepwise Multiple Regression ◽  
Biological Risk ◽  
Neurological Score ◽  
Low Birth Weight Children

Objective. To investigate the effects of biological and social factors on the cognitive development of very low birth weight children, a longitudinal follow-up study was conducted from birth to 3.6 years of age. Methodology. The study group consisted of a cohort of 79 surviving high-risk, very low birth weight infants. Neonatal cerebral ultrasonographic findings and a neurological score were used as indicators of biological risk. A sociodemographic risk score and the Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment inventory were used as indicators of social risk. Cognitive development was assessed at ages 1 and 2 years by the Mental scale of the Bayley Scales of Infant Development and at age 3.6 years by the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children. Results. The mean mental index at 1 year of age was 96 (SD 19), at 2 years of age 86 (SD 26), and at 3.6 years of age for intelligence 87 (SD 13) and for achievement 86 (SD 14). In a stepwise multiple regression analysis of biological as well as social factors, the neurological score alone was the best predictor for cognitive development at 1 year of age, explaining 46% of the variance. From 2 years of age onward, the best predictors for cognitive development were the neurological score together with the home environment, explaining 46% of the variance for the Mental Developmental Index at age 2, 34% for intelligence, and 56% for achievement at age 3.6. Conclusions. Children at high biological risk were able to catch up on their cognitive delay in a highly stimulating home environment. Children at low as well as high biological risk in a less stimulating home environment showed a decline in cognitive development. For these children, early intervention programs might be important in the prevention of cognitive disabilities.

scholarly journals Motor Development in Very Preterm and Very Low-Birth-Weight Children From Birth to Adolescence

JAMA ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 302 (20) ◽  
pp. 2235 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jorrit F. de Kieviet ◽  
Jan P. Piek ◽  
Cornelieke S. Aarnoudse-Moens ◽  
Jaap Oosterlaan
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Low Birth Weight ◽  
Motor Development ◽  
Very Low Birth Weight ◽  
Very Preterm ◽  
Low Birth Weight Children

scholarly journals Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Peak Wall Stress and Peak Wall Rupture Index in Ruptured and Asymptomatic Intact Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tejas P. Singh ◽  
Joseph V. Moxon ◽  
T. Christian Gasser ◽  
Jonathan Golledge
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Wall Stress ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Abdominal Aortic ◽  
Standardized Mean Difference ◽  
Peak Wall Stress ◽  
Meta Analyses

Background Prior studies have suggested aortic peak wall stress (PWS) and peak wall rupture index (PWRI) can estimate the rupture risk of an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), but whether these measurements have independent predictive ability over assessing AAA diameter alone is unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to compare PWS and PWRI in participants with ruptured and asymptomatic intact AAAs of similar diameter. Methods and Results Web of Science, Scopus, Medline, and The Cochrane Library were systematically searched to identify studies assessing PWS and PWRI in ruptured and asymptomatic intact AAAs of similar diameter. Random‐effects meta‐analyses were performed using inverse variance‐weighted methods. Leave‐one‐out sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of findings. Risk of bias was assessed using a modification of the Newcastle‐Ottawa scale and standard quality assessment criteria for evaluating primary research papers. Seven case‐control studies involving 309 participants were included. Meta‐analyses suggested that PWRI (standardized mean difference, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.14–0.70; P =0.004) but not PWS (standardized mean difference, 0.13; 95% CI, −0.18 to 0.44; P =0.418) was greater in ruptured than intact AAAs. Sensitivity analyses suggested that the findings were not dependent on the inclusion of any single study. The included studies were assessed to have a medium to high risk of bias. Conclusions Based on limited evidence, this study suggested that PWRI, but not PWS, is greater in ruptured than asymptomatic intact AAAs of similar maximum aortic diameter.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document