Long-Term Neurodevelopmental Outcome Measures in Preterm Infants: A Systematic Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: Advances in neonatal care have significantly increased the survival of preterm infants, shifting the focus to long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes. Infants born before 37 weeks of gestation are at an elevated risk for a wide spectrum of impairments due to the interruption of critical in-utero brain development. This systematic review synthesizes the current evidence on long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes in preterm infants and the measures used for their assessment. Methods: This review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library was performed to identify observational studies and randomized controlled trials that reported neurodevelopmental outcomes in preterm infants assessed at or after 12 months of age, compared to term-born controls or other preterm subgroups. Two independent reviewers performed study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool for randomized trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. A narrative synthesis was conducted, with results grouped by neurodevelopmental domain. Results: The search yielded 4,720 unique records, from which 8 studies met the inclusion criteria, encompassing a total of 72,974 preterm-born children. The evidence confirms a clear gradient of risk, with the prevalence and severity of impairment increasing with decreasing gestational age. Preterm infants demonstrate significantly higher rates of adverse outcomes across all major domains. Key findings include a pooled prevalence of overall neurodevelopmental impairment of 16% and cerebral palsy of 5% in low- and middle-income countries. Cognitive delays were the most frequently reported outcome, with preterm children scoring, on average, 11-13 points lower on IQ scales than their term-born peers. Increased risks were also consistently found for motor impairments, language delays, academic difficulties, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and internalizing and externalizing behavioral problems. A wide array of assessment tools was identified, with the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development and Wechsler Intelligence Scales being the most common. Discussion: The findings underscore the substantial and persistent burden of neurodevelopmental morbidity following preterm birth. The heterogeneity of assessment tools across studies presents a significant challenge for synthesizing evidence and comparing outcomes. The data suggest a developmental cascade, where early motor and language deficits may contribute to later cognitive and behavioral challenges. The necessity for long-term surveillance is highlighted by "sleeper effects," where some impairments only manifest later in childhood as academic and social demands increase. Conclusion: Preterm birth is a major risk factor for a wide spectrum of long-term neurodevelopmental impairments. Comprehensive, multidisciplinary follow-up programs using validated and context-appropriate assessment tools are essential for early identification and intervention to optimize the developmental potential of this vulnerable population.
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 | 0,053 | 0,012 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».