Literature DB >> 16061586

Poor predictive validity of the Bayley Scales of Infant Development for cognitive function of extremely low birth weight children at school age.

Maureen Hack1, H Gerry Taylor, Dennis Drotar, Mark Schluchter, Lydia Cartar, Deanne Wilson-Costello, Nancy Klein, Harriet Friedman, Nori Mercuri-Minich, Mary Morrow.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The Bayley Scales of Infant Development, Second Edition (BSID II) are commonly used to assess outcomes of extremely low birth weight (ELBW) infants. We sought to assess the predictive validity of the BSID II Mental Developmental Index (MDI) for cognitive function at school age. DESIGN/
METHODS: Of 330 ELBW infants admitted in 1992-1995, 238 (72%) survived to the age of 8 years, of whom 200 (84%) were tested at both 20 months' corrected age (CA) and 8 years. Mean birth weight was 811 g, mean gestational age was 26.4 weeks, 41% were boys, and 60% were black. Measures included the BSID II at 20 months' CA and the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (KABC) Mental Processing Composite (MPC) at 8 years' postnatal age. BSID II MDI and MPC scores were compared and the predictive validity calculated for all 200 ELBW children and for the 154 ELBW neurosensory-intact subgroup. Predictors of stability or change in cognitive scores were examined via logistic regression adjusting for gender and sociodemographic status.
RESULTS: For all ELBW children, the mean MDI was 75.6 +/- 16 versus a mean KABC of 87.8 +/- 19. For the neurosensory-intact subgroup, the mean MDI was 79.3 +/- 16 and the mean KABC was 92.3 +/- 15. Rates of cognitive impairment, defined as an MDI or KABC of <70, dropped from 39% at 20 months' CA to 16% at 8 years for the total ELBW population and from 29% to 7% for the neurosensory-intact subgroup. The positive predictive value of having an MPC of <70 given an MDI of <70 was 0.37 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.27, 0.49) for all ELBW infants, 0.20 (95% CI: 0.10, 0.35) for the neurosensory-intact subgroup, and 0.61 (95% CI: 0.42, 0.77) for the neurosensory-impaired subgroup. The negative predictive values were 0.98, 0.99, and 0.85 for the 3 groups, respectively. Neurosensory impairment at 20 months' CA predicted lack of improvement of cognitive function (odds ratio: 6.9; 95% CI: 2.4, 20.2). Children whose cognitive scores improved between 20 months and 8 years had significantly better school performance than those whose scores stayed at <70, but they did less well than those whose scores were persistently >70.
CONCLUSIONS: The predictive validity of a subnormal MDI for cognitive function at school age is poor but better for ELBW children who have neurosensory impairments. We are concerned that decisions to provide intensive care for ELBW infants in the delivery room might be biased by reported high rates of cognitive impairments based on the use and presumptive validity of the BSID II MDI.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16061586     DOI: 10.1542/peds.2005-0173

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatrics        ISSN: 0031-4005            Impact factor:   7.124


  150 in total

1.  Who Receives Speech/Language Services by 5 Years of Age in the United States?

Authors:  Paul L Morgan; Carol Scheffner Hammer; George Farkas; Marianne M Hillemeier; Steve Maczuga; Michael Cook; Stephanie Morano
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2016-05-01       Impact factor: 2.408

Review 2.  Working group reports: evaluation of the evidence to support practice guidelines for nutritional care of preterm infants-the Pre-B Project.

Authors:  Daniel J Raiten; Alison L Steiber; Susan E Carlson; Ian Griffin; Diane Anderson; William W Hay; Sandra Robins; Josef Neu; Michael K Georgieff; Sharon Groh-Wargo; Tanis R Fenton
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  2016-01-20       Impact factor: 7.045

3.  Predictors of Poor School Readiness in Children Without Developmental Delay at Age 2.

Authors:  Bergen B Nelson; Rebecca N Dudovitz; Tumaini R Coker; Elizabeth S Barnert; Christopher Biely; Ning Li; Peter G Szilagyi; Kandyce Larson; Neal Halfon; Frederick J Zimmerman; Paul J Chung
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2016-07-18       Impact factor: 7.124

4.  Early working memory as a racially and ethnically neutral measure of outcome in extremely preterm children at 18-22 months.

Authors:  Jean R Lowe; Andrea Freeman Duncan; Carla M Bann; Janell Fuller; Susan R Hintz; Abhik Das; Rosemary D Higgins; Kristi L Watterberg
Journal:  Early Hum Dev       Date:  2013-08-29       Impact factor: 2.079

Review 5.  Fluid restriction and prophylactic indomethacin in extremely low birth weight infants.

Authors:  Jasim A Anabrees; Khalid M Aifaleh
Journal:  J Clin Neonatol       Date:  2012-01

Review 6.  Outcome of extreme prematurity: as information increases so do the dilemmas.

Authors:  J L Watts; S Saigal
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 5.747

7.  The Predictive Value of Developmental Assessments at 1 and 2 for Intelligence Quotients at 6.

Authors:  Jessica B Girault; Benjamin W Langworthy; Barbara D Goldman; Rebecca L Stephens; Emil Cornea; J Steven Reznick; Jason Fine; John H Gilmore
Journal:  Intelligence       Date:  2018-03-16

8.  Predicting school readiness from neurodevelopmental assessments at age 2 years after respiratory distress syndrome in infants born preterm.

Authors:  Athena I Patrianakos-Hoobler; Michael E Msall; Dezheng Huo; Jeremy D Marks; Susan Plesha-Troyke; Michael D Schreiber
Journal:  Dev Med Child Neurol       Date:  2009-12-01       Impact factor: 5.449

9.  Comparison of the developmental tests Bayley-III and Bayley-II in 7-month-old infants born preterm.

Authors:  Gitta Reuner; Anna Christine Fields; Andrea Wittke; Martin Löpprich; Joachim Pietz
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2012-12-08       Impact factor: 3.183

10.  Developmental scores at 1 year with increasing gestational age, 37-41 weeks.

Authors:  Olga Rose; Estela Blanco; Suzanna M Martinez; Eastern Kang Sim; Marcela Castillo; Betsy Lozoff; Yvonne E Vaucher; Sheila Gahagan
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2013-04-15       Impact factor: 7.124

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.