Role of early parenting and motor skills on development in children with spina bifida

Lomax-Bream, Laura E.; Taylor, Heather B.; Landry, Susan H.; Barnes, Marcia A.; Fletcher, Jack Μ.; Swank, Paul R.

doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2007.02.004

Cited by 21 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…More proximal parenting and family factors influence cognitive, academic, and behavioral outcomes, including less family stress and dysfunction, greater stability in family structure and residence and greater regularity of contact with both parents, lower levels of parental psychological distress, and home environments that are more child-oriented and invested in literacy development (Gross et al, 2001; McClelland, Kessenich, and Morrison, 2003). Parenting characteristics associated with better developmental progress include warmth, responsiveness, and support for child initiatives (Bernier, Carlson, and Whipple, 2010; Landry et al, 2002; Lomax-Bream et al, 2007; Mahoney, Weeden, and Perales, 2004). Interventions fostering these characteristics promote better development (Landry, Smith, and Swank, 2006; Neville et al, 2013).…”

Section: Whom To Assess: Individual Differences In Reserve Risk and mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The effects of proximal family factors are partially independent of SES, pointing to the importance of environmental variations within families of similar levels of education or economic standing (Lomax-Bream et al, 2007; Taylor et al, 1998). Parenting and family factors also have associations with developmental outcomes that are independent of biological risks and that relate to development in distinct ways (Taylor et al, 1998).…”

Section: Whom To Assess: Individual Differences In Reserve Risk and mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Functional Plasticity in Childhood Brain Disorders: When, What, How, and Whom to Assess

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At every point in the lifespan, the brain balances malleable processes representing neural plasticity that promote change with homeostatic processes that promote stability. Whether a child develops typically or with brain injury, his or her neural and behavioral outcome is constructed through transactions between plastic and homeostatic processes and the environment. In clinical research with children in whom the developing brain has been malformed or injured, behavioral outcomes provide an index of the result of plasticity, homeostasis, and environmental transactions. When should we assess outcome in relation to age at brain insult, time since brain insult, and age of the child at testing? What should we measure? Functions involving reacting to the past and predicting the future, as well as social-affective skills, are important. How should we assess outcome? Information from performance variability, direct measures and informants, overt and covert measures, and laboratory and ecological measures should be considered. In whom are we assessing outcome? Assessment should be cognizant of individual differences in gene, socio-economic status (SES), parenting, nutrition, and interpersonal supports, which are moderators that interact with other factors influencing functional outcome.

show abstract

Section: Whom To Assess: Individual Differences In Reserve Risk and mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Whom To Assess: Individual Differences In Reserve Risk and mentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional Plasticity in Childhood Brain Disorders: When, What, How, and Whom to Assess

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Higher levels and faster rates of growth were found in response to positive parenting of typically developing children compared with the growth of children with spina bifida when those same high-quality parenting strategies were applied (Lomax-Bream et al, 2007). Yet, responsive parenting was related to faster growth in cognition and language among both groups.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

Low‐income parents' warmth and parent–child activities for children with disabilities, suspected delays and biological risks

Eshbaugh

Peterson

Wall

et al. 2010

Infant and Child Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Warm and responsive parenting is optimal for child development, but this style of parenting may be difficult for some parents to achieve. This study examines how parents' observed warmth and their reported frequency of parent-child activities were related to children's classifications as having biological risks or a range of disability indicators. Children were low-income prekindergarteners who participated in the Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Project Longitudinal Follow-up. Data from parent, early care and education staff reports, and direct child assessments were used to classify children into the following groups: disabilities, suspected delays, biological risks, disabilities and biological risk, suspected delays and biological risk, and no disability indicator. Socioeconomic status (ethnicity, maternal education and poverty level) and maternal depression were controlled in the analyses. The parents of children with disabilities and suspected delays evidenced significantly lower levels of warmth and less frequent parent-child activities compared with other parents. The parents of children with biological risk factors who did not also have disabilities or suspected delays did not exhibit decreased warmth and less frequent parentchild activities.

show abstract

“…Until now, only few studies tested the consequences of the link between joint attention skills and locomotor experiences in infants with locomotor delay due to spina bifida myelomeningocele and revealed deficits in joint attention skills in those infants (Campos, Anderson, & Telzrow, ; Rivera, ). However, infants with spina bifida did not only suffer from motor impairments, they also showed deficits in cognitive, language, and daily living skills (Lomax‐Bream et al, ; Lomax‐Bream, Barnes, Copeland, Taylor, & Landry, ). Therefore, it was the aim of the present study to investigate the link between joint attention skills and locomotor experiences in a group of infants, who only suffer from certain locomotor impairments without any other problems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Joint visual attention and locomotor experience: A longitudinal study of infants with treated idiopathic clubfoot

Dillmann

Gehb

Peterlein

et al. 2018

Infant and Child Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to examine the link between joint attention skills and locomotor experiences in infants with locomotor delay due to congenital idiopathic clubfoot compared to typically developing infants. Using a following of point and gaze gesture task, we repeatedly tested joint attention skills of 11 infants with congenital idiopathic clubfoot and 14 typically developing infants at the ages of 6, 9, and 12 months. Additionally, we tested all typically developing infants and eight infants treated for idiopathic clubfoot at onset of crawling on hand and knees and after they had been crawling for about 5 to 6 weeks. Our results confirmed a delayed onset of locomotion in infants treated for idiopathic clubfoot; however, our results did not indicate lower joint attention performances in those infants in general. Moreover, we found a positive effect of crawling on the development of joint attention skills in typically developing infants; however, not in infants treated for idiopathic clubfoot. Our results complement previous work by indicating that locomotor experience, especially crawling is an important, however not necessary agent for developing joint attention skills. Highlights We repeatedly tested the link between crawling experience and joint attention skills in typically developing and infants with locomotor delay due to congenital idiopathic clubfoot. We did not find poorer joint attention performances in clubfoot infants, however crawling facilitated the development of joint attention skills in typically developing infants. Results indicated that locomotor experience, especially crawling is an important, however not necessary agent for developing joint attention skills.

show abstract

Role of early parenting and motor skills on development in children with spina bifida

Cited by 21 publications

References 35 publications

Functional Plasticity in Childhood Brain Disorders: When, What, How, and Whom to Assess

Functional Plasticity in Childhood Brain Disorders: When, What, How, and Whom to Assess

Low‐income parents' warmth and parent–child activities for children with disabilities, suspected delays and biological risks

Joint visual attention and locomotor experience: A longitudinal study of infants with treated idiopathic clubfoot

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About