1872. Neurodevelopment in Apparently Normal Infants from Zika Virus Positive Pregnancies
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Congenital Zika syndrome (CZS) is seen in 5–12% of newborns from Zika virus (ZIKV)-infected pregnancies and includes severe neurologic abnormalities. However, the majority of ZIKV-exposed newborns do not have CZS. The risk for neurodevelopmental impairment for infants without CZS following in utero ZIKV is not well known. The objective was to determine whether infants without CZS exposed to ZIKV in utero, have normal neurodevelopment. Methods We performed a longitudinal study of neurodevelopment in Colombia for infants exposed to ZIKV in utero who had a normal fetal brain MRI (Mulkey et al, JAMA Peds 2019) and normal head circumference at birth. Infant development was assessed by the Warner Initial Developmental Evaluation of Adaptive and Functional Skills (WIDEA) and the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) between 6 and 18 months of age. In-person training was done by a neurologist. The AIMS were video-recorded and scored centrally. Interrater reliability for the novel method of video-based AIMS was determined. WIDEA and AIMS scores were converted to Z-scores compared with normative samples. We also compared development between infants with normal and nonspecific findings on cranial ultrasound (US). Results Seventy-two non-CZS infants had neurodevelopmental tests; 40 were at a mean (SD) of 5.7 (0.9) months and 66 were at 13.5 (3.2) months of age. Thirty-four had two assessments. The total WIDEA, social cognition, and mobility domain scores became more abnormal with postnatal age (figure). The AIMS scores were similar to the normative sample. Three infants had an AIMS score < 2 SD’s below the norm. On cranial US, 19 infants (26%) had a nonspecific finding (lenticulostriate vasculopathy, choroid plexus cysts, subependymal cysts, and/or calcification). Infants with a US finding had a lower WIDEA mobility score than infants with normal US (P = .054). There was a trend toward lower AIMS scores in infants with US findings compared with infants with normal US (P = .26). AIMS Interrater agreement on video-based scoring was good (ICC = 0.73, 95% CI 0.42, 0.87). Conclusion ZIKV-exposed infants without CZS are at risk for neurodevelopmental delay. Nonspecific cranial US findings may represent mild ZIKV-related injury. Long-term neurodevelopmental follow-up is important for all ZIKV-exposed infants. Disclosures All Authors: No reported Disclosures.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».