Is it correct to correct? Developmental milestones in 555 “normal” preterm infants compared with term infants

Ouden, Lya den; Rijken, Monique; Brand, Ronald; Verloove-Vanhorick, S.P.; Ruys, J.H.

doi:10.1016/s0022-3476(05)82154-7

Cited by 61 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Twins born before term were prone to reach their milestones later than twins who are born at term. The correction for GA performed was consistent with the literature where several studies found that gross motor development needs to be corrected in the first 12 to 18 months of life (Allen & Alexander, 1990;Cheung et al, 2001;Den Ouden et al, 1991;Goyen & Lui, 2002;Lems et al, 1993;Lui et al, 2001;Pedersen et al, 2000;Piper et al, 1989). Our study confirms earlier findings.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…This linear effect went from 37.1 weeks in cohort 1 to 36.5 weeks in cohort 5. Conforming to other studies (GA; Allen & Alexander, 1990;Cheung et al, 2001;Den Ouden et al, 1991;Goyen & Lui, 2002;Lems et al, 1993;Lui et al, 2001;Piper et al, 1989) we found that the effect of GA was significant for all motor milestones (p < .001). Pearson correlations were -.246 for turn, -.249 for sit, -.191 for crawl, -.236 for stand, and -.246 for walk.…”

Section: Twins Versus Singletonssupporting

confidence: 86%

“…Twins are born preterm more often than singletons. Several studies report that a delay in motor development is associated with low birthweight and shorter gestational age (GA; Allen & Alexander, 1990;Cheung et al, 2001;Den Ouden et al, 1991;Goyen & Lui, 2002;Lems et al, 1993;Lui et al, 2001;Piper et al, 1989). Therefore, when studying the early motor development in twins, GA should be taken into account (Peter et al, 1999).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Influences on Achieving Motor Milestones: A Twin–Singleton Study

Brouwer

Beijsterveldt²,

Bartels³

et al. 2006

twin res hum genet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Twins Versus Singletonssupporting

confidence: 86%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Influences on Achieving Motor Milestones: A Twin–Singleton Study

Brouwer

Beijsterveldt²,

Bartels³

et al. 2006

twin res hum genet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although this method do not conform the generally accepted clinical suggestion (see Allen and Alexander (1990); Ouden, Rijken, Brand, Verloovevanhorick, and Ruys (1991); Restiffe and Gherpelli (2006) our reasons were the following: i) definition of gestational age, and consequently the value of correction is debated (see Lems, Hopkins, and Samsom (1993);Siegel (1983); Urquia, Moineddin, and Frank (2012); ii) testing speech perception in relation to the duration of experience with the mother tongue seemed to be more important than the definition of developmental lag; iii) as the developmental dynamics are different in the pre-and postnatal periods, it is not easy to define the exact developmental lag in case of individual infants (cf. Kosińska (2006) who suggests that using chronological age is acceptable and sometimes more reasonable when we try to emphasize the role of duration of intrauterine developmental differences, and the influence of gestational age in development).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 75%

Effect of maturation on suprasegmental speech processing in full- and preterm infants: A mismatch negativity study

Ragó

Honbolygó

Róna

et al. 2014

Research in Developmental Disabilities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Infants born prematurely are at higher risk for later linguistic deficits present in delayed or atypical processing of phonetic and prosodic information. In order to be able to specify the nature of this atypical development, it is important to investigate the role of early experience in language perception. According to the concept of Gonzalez-Gomez and Nazzi (2012) there is a special intrauterine sensitivity to the prosodic features of languages that should have a special role in language acquisition. Therefore, we may also assume that pre-and full-term infants having months difference in intrauterine experience show different maturation patterns of processing prosodic and phonetic information present at word level. The aim of our study was to investigate the effect of these differences on word stress pattern vs. phoneme information processing. Two age groups of infants (6 and 10 month-olds) were included in our study. 21 of 46 of the total of infants investigated were prematurely born with low birth weight. We used the mismatch negativity (MMN) event related brain potential (ERP) component, a widely used electrophysiological correlate of acoustic change detection, for testing the assumed developmental changes of phoneme and word stress discrimination. In a passive oddball paradigm we used a word as standard, a pseudoword as phoneme deviant, and an illegally uttered word as stress deviant. Our results showed no differences in MMN responses in the phoneme deviant condition between the groups, meaning a relatively intact maturation of phoneme processing of preterm infants as compared to their contemporaries. However, the mismatch responses measured in the stress condition revealed significant betweengroup differences. These results strengthen the view that the total length of intrauterine experience influences the time of emergence of prosodic processing.

show abstract

“…This decision was made at the outset of the study based on studies which recommend correction for preterm birth during developmental assessments up to two years of age. [33][34] Children with documented complex medical and developmental disabilities were not enrolled based on the exclusion criteria.…”

Section: Characteristics Of the Study Populationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of newborn hearing screening on communication development

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Universal newborn hearing screening has become standard practice in many countries. The primary goal of this study was to assess the impact of early identification of permanent childhood hearing loss on oral communication development. Setting Participants were recruited from three clinical programmes in two cities in the province of Ontario, Canada. The study sample was born during two consecutive periods of newborn hearing screening. The first period, prior to 2002, was targeted on high-risk infants only, and the second, from 2002, included both high-and standard-risk infants (universal newborn hearing screening -UNHS). All children were enrolled in rehabilitation programmes focused on oral language development. Methods In this multicentre observational study, 65 children under the age of five years with onset of hearing loss before six months of age, 26 identified through systematic newborn screening (14 through targeted screening and 12 through UNHS) and 39 without screening, were assessed with an extensive battery of child-and parent-administered speech and language measures. The degree of hearing loss ranged from mild to profound with 22 children in the mild, moderate and moderately severe categories and 43 in the severe and profound categories. Data are reported for the three-year study period. Results The screened group of children was identified at a median age of 6.6 (interquartile range, 3.0-8.2) months and children referred from sources other than newborn screening were diagnosed at a median age of 16.5 (interquartile range, 10.2-29.0) months. Assessment of oral communication development showed no significant difference between the screened and unscreened groups. The communication outcomes for children identified before 12 months of age did not differ from those of later identified children. Conclusions Systematic screening of newborn hearing results in earlier identification and intervention for children with permanent hearing loss. Superior language outcome following newborn screening was not demonstrable in the setting of this study.

show abstract

Is it correct to correct? Developmental milestones in 555 “normal” preterm infants compared with term infants

Cited by 61 publications

References 9 publications

Influences on Achieving Motor Milestones: A Twin–Singleton Study

Influences on Achieving Motor Milestones: A Twin–Singleton Study

Effect of maturation on suprasegmental speech processing in full- and preterm infants: A mismatch negativity study

The impact of newborn hearing screening on communication development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About