Prediction of Five-Year Stanford-Binet Scores in Preterm Infants

Abstract

The development of a group of 100 preterm infants, mean birth weight 1,877 grams, from a broad range of social class and ethnic backgrounds was followed from birth to age 5. Assessments in infancy were directed at medical problems and early perceptual, motor, social, and cognitive development. The child's performance on the Stanford-Binet test at age 5 could not be predicted from early hazardous events in the obstetrical or neonatal period. The results indicate that developmental outcome at age 5 could be predicted moderately from a single measure, infant visual attention, administered as early as term date. Prediction was improved by using a combination of assessments given during the first 9 months. Furthermore, prediction was significantly better for girls than for boys. Although moderate stability in performance was found for the group as a whole, prediction of an individual's performance resulted in a substantial number of children being misclassified. Social factors were more important than any other set of factors in relating to the child's mental performance at age 5.

Longitudinal relations of maternal supportiveness and child task-approach behavior to early cognitive development of children with developmental risks

“…The Bayley Mental Development Index (MDI; Bayley, 1993) has been used commonly as a measure of cognitive development for infants and young children through three years of age (Black & Berenson-Howard, 2000;Halpem, Carcia Coll, Meyer, & Bendersky, 2001;Hooper, Burchinal, Roberts, Zeisel, & Neebe, 1998;Murrary, FioriCowley, & Cooper, 1996;Wijnroks, 1998). The Stanfbrd-Binet Intelligence Scale (Bacharach & Baumeister, 1998;Cohen & Parmelee, 1983;Krishnakumar & Black, 2002) and the McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities (Croft, et al, 2001) have been used to measure the cognitive skills of children older than three years. Ayoun (1998) and Tzuriel and Weiss (1998) have measured specific cognitive skills such as search for hidden objects, learning of a contingency rule, or cognitive modifiability.…”

“…Parent-child interactions (Ayoun, 1998;Cohen & Parmelee, 1983;Croft, et al, 2001;Halpem, et al, 2001;Hopper, et al, 1998;Poehlmann & Fiese, 2001;Tzurie & Weiss, 1988;Wijnroks, 1998), quality of the home environment (Bacharach & Baumeister, 1998;Hopper, et al, 1998;Krishnakumar and Black, 2002;Murray, et al, 1996), child characteristics (Bacharach & Baumeister, 1998;Black & Berenson-Howard, 2000;Cohen & Parmelee, 1983;Halpem, et al, 2001;Murray, et al, 1996;Poehlmann & Fiese, 2001;Tzurie & Weiss, 1988;Wijnroks, 1998), and familial risk factors (Bacharach & Baumeister, 1998;Cohen & Parmelee, 1983;Hopper, et al, 1998;Krishnakumar & Black, 2002;Murray, et al, 1996;Poehlmann & Fiese, 2001) have all been used to predict child cognitive development. In later sections of this literature review, parent-child interactions, child characteristics, and familial factors will each be discussed in more detail.…”

“…Other researchers have investigated child cognition using the same samples across different time points (e.g., Cohen & Parmelee, 1983;Croft, et al, 2001;Halpem, et al, 2001;Krishnakumar & Black, 2002;Wijnroks, 1998) in efforts to understand developmental changes in children's cognition. Cohen and Parmelee (1983) found that cognition at age five was predicted by infant's early visual attention and by a combination of developmental assessments (e.g., GeselTs Developmental Schedules for maturation level of the infant, the Bayley MDI, Casati-Lezine Cognitive Development for sensory motor development, and receptive language development).…”

“…Cohen and Parmelee (1983) found that cognition at age five was predicted by infant's early visual attention and by a combination of developmental assessments (e.g., GeselTs Developmental Schedules for maturation level of the infant, the Bayley MDI, Casati-Lezine Cognitive Development for sensory motor development, and receptive language development). Maternal education was related to child cognition at 24 months and five years, but infant neonatal risks did not predict cognition at age five years or at any of the earlier age periods.…”

“…Some studies have conducted separate analyses to examine predictors of cognition at different time points and have found that relations between predictors and cognition are different at each time point, which does not explain later cognition or patterns of cognitive development (Cohen & Parmelee, 1983;Halpem, et al, 2001). Other studies have used autoregressive models to examine earlier cognition as a predictor of later cognition, however the ability to capture longitudinal relations with this method is limited (Wijnroks, 1998;Krishnakumar & Black, 2002).…”