Risk and protective factors for child development: An observational South African birth cohort

Abstract

BackgroundApproximately 250 million (43%) children under the age of 5 years in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are failing to meet their developmental potential. Risk factors are recognised to contribute to this loss of human potential. Expanding understanding of the risks that lead to poor outcomes and which protective factors contribute to resilience in children may be critical to improving disparities.Methods and findingsThe Drakenstein Child Health Study is a population-based birth cohort in the Western Cape, South Africa. Pregnant women were enrolled between 20 and 28 weeks’ gestation from two community clinics from 2012 to 2015; sociodemographic and psychosocial data were collected antenatally. Mothers and children were followed through birth until 2 years of age. Developmental assessments were conducted by trained assessors blinded to background, using the Bayley-III Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (BSID-III), validated for use in South Africa, at 24 months of age. The study assessed all available children at 24 months; however, some children were not able to attend, because of loss to follow-up or unavailability of a caregiver or child at the correct age. Of 1,143 live births, 1,002 were in follow-up at 24 months, and a total of 734 children (73%) had developmental assessments, of which 354 (48.2%) were girls. This sample was characterised by low household employment (n = 183; 24.9%) and household income (n = 287; 39.1% earning <R1,000 per month), and high prevalence of maternal psychosocial risk factors including alcohol use in pregnancy (n = 95; 14.5%), smoking (n = 241; 34.7%), depression (n = 156; 23.7%), lifetime intimate partner violence (n = 310; 47.3%), and history of maternal childhood trauma (n = 228; 34.7%). A high proportion of children were categorised as delayed (defined by scoring < −1 standard deviation below the mean scaled score calculated using the BSID-III norms from a United States population) in different domains (369 [50.5%] cognition, 402 [55.6%] receptive language, 389 [55.4%] expressive language, 169 [23.2%] fine motor, and 267 [38.4%] gross motor). Four hundred five (55.3%) children had >1 domain affected, and 75 (10.2%) had delay in all domains. Bivariate and multivariable analyses revealed several factors that were associated with developmental outcomes. These included protective factors (maternal education, higher birth weight, and socioeconomic status) and risk factors (maternal anaemia in pregnancy, depression or lifetime intimate partner violence, and maternal HIV infection). Boys consistently performed worse than girls (in cognition [β = −0.74; 95% CI −1.46 to −0.03, p = 0.042], receptive language [β = −1.10; 95% CI −1.70 to −0.49, p < 0.001], expressive language [β = −1.65; 95% CI −2.46 to −0.84, p < 0.001], and fine motor [β = −0.70; 95% CI −1.20 to −0.20, p = 0.006] scales). There was evidence that child sex interacted with risk and protective factors including birth weight, maternal anaemia in pregnancy, and socioeconomic factors. Important limitation...

Growth and neurodevelopment in low birth weight versus normal birth weight infants from birth to 24 months, born in an obstetric emergency hospital in Haiti, a prospective cohort study

“…This suggests that the cognitive development and communication of LBW babies in Haitian society are delayed. This is not unexpected and has been well described in other studies [33]. One unexpected finding from this study was that male babies had consistently higher estimates for weight, length, cognitive skills and communication skills in both the NBW and LBW groups.…”

“…Of the infants enrolled, more LBW infants were female compared to NBW infants (58.4% vs. 42.4%) ( Table 1). The mean gestational age in LBW babies was approximately five weeks shorter than in NBW babies (LBW: 35 weeks [IQR: [32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39], NBW: 40 weeks [39][40]; p < 0.001). According to the prematurity categories, 16 NBW babies (8.2%) were born with late or moderate prematurity (32 to 36 weeks gestational age) ( Table 1).…”

Neurodevelopment of HIV-exposed uninfected children in Cape Town, South Africa

“…We found that children of mothers with higher SES were less likely to experience neurodevelopment delay in these domains; higher SES may provide a healthy and stimulating home environment, with positive impact on child neurodevelopment [34][35][36][37]. Other African studies also report higher maternal SES to be positively associated with child gross-fine motor neurodevelopment [38,39], which may be partly due to educated mothers being knowledgeable about the importance of providing stimulating environment for their children, and those employed able to afford physically-stimulating learning activities. Higher maternal SES may mediate child neurodevelopment through improved child nutrition [39].…”

Nutrition, growth, and other factors associated with early cognitive and motor development in Sub‐Saharan Africa: a scoping review

“…Several maternal protective and risk factors were associated with cognitive and motor developmental outcomes. For example, maternal education and SES were shown to be protective factors whereas maternal anaemia in pregnancy, depression, partner violence and HIV infection were shown to be risk factors ( 41 ) . Maternal weight and diet also influenced neurobehavioural and motor performance at birth and at 6 months.…”