OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of biological and social factors on the cognitive development of very low birth weight children, a longitudinal follow-up study was conducted from birth to 3.6 years of age. METHODOLOGY: The study group consisted of a cohort of 79 surviving high-risk, very low birth weight infants. Neonatal cerebral ultrasonographic findings and a neurological score were used as indicators of biological risk. A sociodemographic risk score and the Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment inventory were used as indicators of social risk. Cognitive development was assessed at ages 1 and 2 years by the Mental scale of the Bayley Scales of Infant Development and at age 3.6 years by the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children. RESULTS: The mean mental index at 1 year of age was 96 (SD 19), at 2 years of age 86 (SD 26), and at 3.6 years of age for intelligence 87 (SD 13) and for achievement 86 (SD 14). In a stepwise multiple regression analysis of biological as well as social factors, the neurological score alone was the best predictor for cognitive development at 1 year of age, explaining 46% of the variance. From 2 years of age onward, the best predictors for cognitive development were the neurological score together with the home environment, explaining 46% of the variance for the Mental Developmental Index at age 2, 34% for intelligence, and 56% for achievement at age 3.6. CONCLUSIONS: Children at high biological risk were able to catch up on their cognitive delay in a highly stimulating home environment. Children at low as well as high biological risk in a less stimulating home environment showed a decline in cognitive development. For these children, early intervention programs might be important in the prevention of cognitive disabilities.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of biological and social factors on the cognitive development of very low birth weight children, a longitudinal follow-up study was conducted from birth to 3.6 years of age. METHODOLOGY: The study group consisted of a cohort of 79 surviving high-risk, very low birth weight infants. Neonatal cerebral ultrasonographic findings and a neurological score were used as indicators of biological risk. A sociodemographic risk score and the Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment inventory were used as indicators of social risk. Cognitive development was assessed at ages 1 and 2 years by the Mental scale of the Bayley Scales of Infant Development and at age 3.6 years by the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children. RESULTS: The mean mental index at 1 year of age was 96 (SD 19), at 2 years of age 86 (SD 26), and at 3.6 years of age for intelligence 87 (SD 13) and for achievement 86 (SD 14). In a stepwise multiple regression analysis of biological as well as social factors, the neurological score alone was the best predictor for cognitive development at 1 year of age, explaining 46% of the variance. From 2 years of age onward, the best predictors for cognitive development were the neurological score together with the home environment, explaining 46% of the variance for the Mental Developmental Index at age 2, 34% for intelligence, and 56% for achievement at age 3.6. CONCLUSIONS:Children at high biological risk were able to catch up on their cognitive delay in a highly stimulating home environment. Children at low as well as high biological risk in a less stimulating home environment showed a decline in cognitive development. For these children, early intervention programs might be important in the prevention of cognitive disabilities.
Authors: Pradeep Kumar; M Jeeva Sankar; Savita Sapra; Ramesh Agarwal; Ashok K Deorari; Vinod K Paul Journal: Indian J Pediatr Date: 2008-06-08 Impact factor: 1.967
Authors: Athena I Patrianakos-Hoobler; Michael E Msall; Jeremy D Marks; Dezheng Huo; Michael D Schreiber Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2009-07 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Rachel E Lean; Rachel A Paul; Christopher D Smyser; Cynthia E Rogers Journal: J Child Psychol Psychiatry Date: 2017-09-19 Impact factor: 8.982
Authors: M K C Nair; R M Sunitha; M L Leena; Babu George; Deepa Bhaskaran; Paul Swamidhas Sudhakar Russell Journal: Indian J Pediatr Date: 2014-11-29 Impact factor: 1.967
Authors: Matthew Laughon; Michael T O'Shea; Elizabeth N Allred; Carl Bose; Karl Kuban; Linda J Van Marter; Richard A Ehrenkranz; Alan Leviton Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2009-07-20 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Wanda D Barfield; Karen M Clements; Kimberly G Lee; Milton Kotelchuck; Nancy Wilber; Paul H Wise Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2007-06-12