Neurodevelopmental Outcomes in Preterm Infants Receiving Kangaroo Mother Care: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Kangaroo Mother Care (KMC) has been growing in popularity due to its unique practices of skin-to-skin contact and exclusive breastfeeding, alongside its many benefits to the wellbeing of pre-term infants. While previous research has acknowledged KMC's contributions in stabilizing vital signs and enhancing bonding, there is an increasing interest in its long-range effects on the neurodevelopmental outcomes of infants which include cognitive, motor, and emotional development. With this overarching goal, this systematic review aims to focus on literature discussing the developmental outcomes of preterm infants undergoing KMC. Objective: To conduct a systematic review of the published literature on the impact of Kangaroo Mother Care on the neurodevelopmental outcomes, specifically cognitive, motor, and socio-emotional development, of preterm infants. This review intends to trace the circles of trends, gaps, or contradictions in the body of literature pertaining to early KMC implementation and their accrued outcomes in relation to neurodevelopment. Methods: A search was performed using PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Google Scholar and Web of Science for articles published between the years 2010 to 2025. Studies that focused on preterm infants less than 37 weeks gestational age and performed KMC together with reporting on neurodevelopmental outcomes were considered for inclusion with criteria. Information was collected on the study’s design, sample size, implementation of the intervention, assessment tools used such as the Bayley Scales, and neurodevelopmental outcomes. Methodological quality was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Where necessary, descriptive and correlation analyses complemented the adopted narrative synthesis approach. Results: From the screened studies, a total of 58 were found to meet the set inclusion criteria. Most of the studies reported that KMC recipients demonstrated significantly better cognitive and motor skill development when compared with the conventional care groups. Emotional regulation, mother–infant bonding, and attentional responsiveness also showed positive correlations with KMC exposure. Findings suggest that the enhancement in neurodevelopmental trajectories for KMC recipients is sustained with prolonged KMC, especially when it started in the first week of life. Conclusions: This systematic review reinforces the evidence-based low-cost intervention nature of KMC, emphasizing its importance at this period of life. KMC not only physiologically stabilizes the babies but also tangibly positively influences their brain development. Longitudinal studies are needed to assess the impact of caregiver consistency, socio-cultural factors, and health system integration on the outcome sub-chronically expected with KMC
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".