CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 85Infant Development and Preterm CareDevelopmental and Educational NeuropsychologyAutism Spectrum Disorder Research

Sensory processing in preterm preschoolers and its association with executive function

Open access
Adams, Jenna N., Feldman, Heidi M., Huffman, Lynne C., Loe, Irene M.·2015·Early Human Development
DOI 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2015.01.013PMC PMC4392005
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background Symptoms of abnormal sensory processing have been related to preterm birth, but have not yet been studied specifically in preterm preschoolers. The degree of association between sensory processing and other domains is important for understanding the role of sensory processing symptoms in the development of preterm children. Aims To test two related hypotheses: (1) preterm preschoolers have more sensory processing symptoms than full term preschoolers and (2) sensory processing is associated with both executive function and adaptive function in preterm preschoolers. Study Design Cross-sectional study Subjects Preterm children (≤34 weeks of gestation; n = 54) and full term controls (≥37 weeks of gestation; n = 73) ages 3-5 years. Outcome Measures Sensory processing was assessed with the Short Sensory Profile. Executive function was assessed with (1) parent ratings on the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function- Preschool version and (2) a performance-based battery of tasks. Adaptive function was assessed with the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales-II. Results Preterm preschoolers showed significantly more sensory symptoms than full term controls. A higher percentage of preterm than full term preschoolers had elevated numbers of sensory symptoms (37% vs. 12%). Sensory symptoms in preterm preschoolers were associated with scores on executive function measures, but were not significantly associated with adaptive function. Conclusions Preterm preschoolers exhibited more sensory symptoms than full term controls. Preterm preschoolers with elevated numbers of sensory symptoms also showed executive function impairment. Future research should further examine whether sensory processing and executive function should be considered independent or overlapping constructs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2015.01.013

Cites

Statistics

6 tests recomputed · 0 with the reported and recomputed p on opposite sides of .05

Claims the paper makes

0 of 44 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    37% of the preterm sample was classified as having elevated numbers of sensory symptoms.

    “The percentage of preterm children classified as having elevated numbers of sensory symptoms (37%) was consistent with results of a study by Wickremasinghe et al. (2013), who found that 39% of their preterm sample ages 1 to 8 years was classified as having atypical sensory processing on the Sensory Profile [9].”
    • Also stated in: § 5. Conclusions · plain
      “In this sample, over one-third of preschool age preterm children exhibited parent-reported elevated numbers of sensory processing symptoms.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Gestational age was a significant predictor of sensory processing scores in this sample.

    “We also found that gestational age was a significant predictor of sensory processing scores, consistent with previous studies [10].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    12% of full-term children were classified as having elevated numbers of sensory symptoms.

    “Furthermore, our finding that 12% of full term children classified as having elevated numbers of sensory symptoms was consistent with the 13% rate found in a study of typically developing kindergarteners [29], suggesting that the SSP behaved similarly in our study.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    In the preterm sample, brain injury classification showed no significant association with sensory processing scores.

    “The model was not significant (p = 0.54), indicating that brain injury classification was not significantly associated with sensory processing scores.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Within the preterm sample, there was no significant association between gross structural brain injury or medical complications and sensory processing ability.

    “There was no significant association between either gross structural brain injury or medical complications and sensory processing ability within the preterm sample.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 21
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 18

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Birth weight was a significant predictor of SSP total score, while SES, sex, and twin status were not.

    “Birth weight was a significant predictor (p < 0.001), while SES, sex, and twin status remained non-significant.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In a linear regression within the preterm sample predicting Vineland-II ABC, BRIEF-P GEC was a significant predictor, p < 0.001, while SSP total score was not, p = 0.40.

    “Linear regression analysis within the preterm sample predicting to the Vineland-II ABC included SSP total score and BRIEF-P GEC as predictors. The BRIEF-P GEC was a significant predictor (p = < 0.001), though the SSP total score was not (p = 0.40).”
    • Also stated in: § 4. Discussion · plain
      “Additionally, sensory processing scores, in contrast with executive function scores, did not contribute to variance in adaptive function scores within the preterm sample.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Five of seven SSP subscales showed the same preterm-full term difference, all p < 0.01.

    “The pattern was replicated in five out of seven SSP subscales, all p’s < 0.01 (Table 2).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    On the performance-based EF battery, PT+S and PT−S differed significantly on the Gift Wrap task, X2(1) = 5.68, p = 0.02, with more PT+S children peeking before the allotted time.

    “On the performance-based EF battery, there was a significant difference between the performance of PT+S and PT−S on the Gift Wrap task, X2(1) = 5.68, p = 0.02. More children in the PT+S group peeked before the allotted time than children in the PT−S group.”
    • Also stated in: § 4. Discussion · plain
      “Preterm children with elevated numbers of sensory symptoms performed significantly worse than preterm children with typical numbers of sensory symptoms on the Gift Wrap task.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The mean GEC score of PT+S fell in the clinically elevated range for executive function impairment, while the mean GEC of PT−S fell in the average range.

    “While the mean GEC score of the preterm with typical numbers of sensory symptoms group fell within the average range, the mean GEC score of the preterm with elevated numbers of sensory symptoms group fell within the clinically elevated range for executive function impairment.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The preterm group had lower mean scores than the full-term group on the SSP total score and five of seven subscale scores.

    “The preterm group had lower mean scores compared to the full term group for the SSP total score and five of seven subscale scores, indicating that the sensory symptoms were not specific to a single sensory domain, such as vision versus audition.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    On the parent-rated BRIEF-P GEC, preterm children with elevated sensory symptoms scored significantly higher than preterm children with typical sensory symptoms, indicating greater executive function impairment.

    “On the parent-rated BRIEF-P GEC, the difference between PT+S and PT−S was significant, U = 133.00, z = −3.42, p < 0.001, r = −0.48 (Table 4). PT+S had higher scores than PT−S, indicating more executive function impairment.”
    • Also stated in: § 4. Discussion · boosted
      “On parent ratings of executive function, differences between the preterm groups with elevated or typical numbers of sensory symptoms were highly significant.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In the full sample, a linear regression model with gestational age, maternal education, sex, and twin status predicting SSP total score was significant and explained 16.4% of variance.

    “The model was significant at p < 0.001, and explained 16.4% of the variance in SSP total score.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    A higher proportion of preterm preschoolers than full term preschoolers are classified as having elevated numbers of sensory symptoms (37% vs 12%), a significant difference.

    “A higher percentage of preterm than full term preschoolers had elevated numbers of sensory symptoms (37% vs. 12%).”
    • Also stated in: § 3.2. Sensory Processing · plain
      “A higher percentage of preterm than full term children were classified as having elevated numbers of sensory symptoms, 37% vs. 12%, respectively (Table 2).”
    • Also stated in: § 3.2. Sensory Processing · boosted
      “This association between birth status and sensory symptom classification was highly significant, X2(1) = 10.75, p < 0.001.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Correlations between BRIEF-P and SSP subscales ranged from non-significant to highly associated and varied by subscale.

    “Correlation coefficient values between BRIEF-P and SSP subscales ranged from non-significant to highly associated, and varied as a function of subscale (Table 5).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    PT+S children were rated as atypical or impaired on both SSP and BRIEF-P, while rated in the average range on Vineland-II.

    “Preterm children with elevated numbers of sensory symptoms were rated as atypical or impaired on both the SSP and the BRIEF-P, while rated in the average range on the Vineland-II.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Missing data occurred for several measures with specific counts.

    “Missing data is as follows: BRIEF-P, n = 3; Vineland-II, n = 5; Day/Night, n = 1; Bird/Dragon, n = 1; Verbal Fluency, n = 13; Gift Wrap, n = 2.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    Internal consistency for the SSP total score was high (Cronbach's α = 0.96).

    “The SSP total score has high internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.96), as reported in the manual [26].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [26] McIntosh D Miller L Shyu V Dunn W Overview of the short sensory profile (SSP) The Sensory Profile: Examiner’s Manual 1999 59 73

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    In preterm toddlers, sensory processing measures correlate with cognition and language measures.

    “Measures of sensory processing have been found to correlate with measures of cognition and language in preterm toddlers [18].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [18] Eeles AL Anderson PJ Brown NC Lee KJ Boyd RN Spittle AJ Sensory profiles obtained from parental reports correlate with independent assessments of development in very preterm children at 2 years of age Early Hum Dev 2013 89 12 1075 80 23978398 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    Preterm and full term groups did not differ significantly in age, sex, or race.

    “There were no significant differences between the preterm and full term groups in regard to age, sex, or race.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    In adults with Alzheimer's disease, reduced auditory sensory gating is associated with worse executive function task performance.

    “Reduced auditory sensory gating has been found to coincide with poorer performance on executive function tasks in adults with autism [25] and Alzheimer’s disease [24].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [24] Thomas C vom Berg I Rupp A Seidl U Schroder J Roesch-Ely D P50 gating deficit in Alzheimer dementia correlates to frontal neuropsychological function Neurobiol Aging 2010 31 3 416 24 18562045 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    The BRIEF-P GEC demonstrated high internal consistency (α = 0.95) and test-retest reliability (r = 0.90).

    “The GEC, which has high internal consistency (α = 0.95) and test-retest reliability (r = 0.90) as reported in the manual [20], was the main outcome measure used in analyses.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [20] Gioia GA Epsy KA Isquith PK Behavior rating inventory of executive function, preschool version (BRIEF-P) Lutz, FL Psychological Assessment Resources 2003

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    The Vineland-II ABC demonstrated high internal consistency (α = 0.97) and test-retest reliability (r = 0.94).

    “The ABC, which has high internal consistency (α = 0.97) and test-retest reliability (r = 0.94) as reported in the manual [23], was used in our analyses.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [23] Sparrow SS Balla DA Cicchetti DV Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Second Edition Bloomington, MN Pearson Assessments 2005

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Among toddlers with autism, sensory scores predicted adaptive behavior scores even after accounting for autism symptom severity.

    “In toddlers with autism, sensory scores significantly predicted adaptive behavior scores, over and above the severity of autism symptoms [2].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [2] Rogers SJ Hepburn S Wehner E Parent reports of sensory symptoms in toddlers with autism and those with other developmental disorders J Autism Dev Disord 2003 33 6 631 42 14714932 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Executive function and adaptive function deficits are well documented in preterm preschoolers and children.

    “Deficits in executive function and adaptive function have been well documented in preterm preschoolers and children [7, 19].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [7] Aarnoudse-Moens CS Weisglas-Kuperus N van Goudoever JB Oosterlaan J Meta-analysis of neurobehavioral outcomes in very preterm and/or very low birth weight children Pediatrics 2009 124 2 717 28 19651588 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [19] Msall ME Park JJ The spectrum of behavioral outcomes after extreme prematurity: regulatory, attention, social, and adaptive dimensions Semin Perinatol 2008 32 1 42 50 18249239 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Inhibition has been theorized to be an important component in sensory processing.

    “The Gift Wrap task measures the executive function domain of inhibition, which has been theorized to be an important component in sensory processing [22].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [22] Kastner S Ungerleider LG Mechanisms of visual attention in the human cortex Annu Rev Neurosci 2000 23 315 41 10845067 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    In adults with autism, reduced auditory sensory gating is associated with worse executive function task performance.

    “Reduced auditory sensory gating has been found to coincide with poorer performance on executive function tasks in adults with autism [25] and Alzheimer’s disease [24].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [25] Perry W Minassian A Lopez B Maron L Lincoln A Sensorimotor gating deficits in adults with autism Biol Psychiatry 2007 61 4 482 6 16460695 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Prior research has linked elevated sensory symptoms with premature birth.

    “Research to date has found elevated levels of sensory symptoms to be associated with premature birth [8–10], and has primarily focused on preterm infants and toddlers.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [8] Eeles AL Anderson PJ Brown NC Lee KJ Boyd RN Spittle AJ Sensory profiles of children born <30weeks’ gestation at 2 years of age and their environmental and biological predictors Early Hum Dev 2013 89 9 727 32 23764299 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [9] Wickremasinghe AC Rogers EE Johnson BC Shen A Barkovich AJ Marco EJ Children born prematurely have atypical sensory profiles J Perinatol 2013 33 8 631 5 23412641 PMC3738436 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [10] Franci Crepeau-Hobson M The relationship between perinatal risk factors and sensory processing difficulties in preschool children J Dev Phys Disabil 2009 21 4 315 28 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Atypical sensory profiles have been observed in preterm individuals from 1 to 8 years old.

    “Atypical sensory profiles were also observed in a broad age range of preterm infants and children, ranging from 1 to 8 years of age [9].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [9] Wickremasinghe AC Rogers EE Johnson BC Shen A Barkovich AJ Marco EJ Children born prematurely have atypical sensory profiles J Perinatol 2013 33 8 631 5 23412641 PMC3738436 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    More preterm children were part of a twin set compared with full term children.

    “The preterm group also had more children as part of a twin set than the full term sample.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    The proportion of children receiving occupational therapy did not differ significantly between PT+S and PT−S.

    “Additionally, there was no significant difference between PT+S and PT−S in the proportion of children in occupational therapy, X2(1) = 1.36, p = 0.24.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Children with Williams syndrome and high sensory impairment scored worse on executive and adaptive function measures than those with low sensory impairment.

    “Finally, in a study of children with Williams syndrome, children classified as having high sensory impairment had poorer scores on both executive function and adaptive function measures than children classified as having low sensory impairment [5].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [5] John AE Mervis CB Sensory modulation impairments in children with Williams syndrome Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet 2010 154C 2 266 76 20425786 PMC2997471 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Nine-year-old preterm children showed reduced electrophysiological auditory responses relative to full term children in one study.

    “A study of 9-year-old preterm children found reduced electrophysiological responses to auditory stimuli compared to the responses of full term children [14].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [14] Gomot M Bruneau N Laurent JP Barthelemy C Saliba E Left temporal impairment of auditory information processing in prematurely born 9-year-old children: an electrophysiological study Int J Psychophysiol 2007 64 2 123 9 17306396 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    PT+S and PT−S groups did not differ significantly in demographics, brain injury, or medical complications.

    “No significant differences were found between PT+S and PT−S in demographic variables, brain injury, or medical complications.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The association between sensory processing and executive function suggests that elevated numbers of sensory symptoms in preterm children are related to specific neurodevelopmental deficits rather than occurring in isolation.

    “The association found between sensory processing and executive function suggests that elevated numbers of sensory symptoms in preterm children are related to specific neurodevelopmental deficits [18], rather than occurring in isolation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [18] Eeles AL Anderson PJ Brown NC Lee KJ Boyd RN Spittle AJ Sensory profiles obtained from parental reports correlate with independent assessments of development in very preterm children at 2 years of age Early Hum Dev 2013 89 12 1075 80 23978398 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Elevated numbers of sensory symptoms in preterm children were associated with executive function impairment but not poor adaptive function.

    “Elevated numbers of sensory symptoms in preterm children were associated with executive function impairment, but not poor adaptive function.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Performance-based and parent-rated measures of executive function contribute divergent but related information to the measurement of executive function ability.

    “Previous research has demonstrated that performance-based and parent-rated measures of executive function contribute divergent but related information to the measurement of executive function ability [28].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [28] Loe IM Chatav M Alduncin N Complementary assessements of executive function in preterm and full term preschoolers Child Neuropsychol 2014 22 1 23 24754400 PMC4240749 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Executive functions measured by both performance-based tasks and parent-rating scales are associated with neuroanatomical integrity.

    “Neuroimaging studies have also found that executive functions measured by both performance based-tasks and parent-rating scales are associated with neuroanatomical integrity [31].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [31] Isquith PK Roth RM Gioia G Contribution of rating scales to the assessment of executive functions Appl Neuropsychol Child 2013 2 2 125 32 23442015 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The data do not support the second hypothesis and suggest that sensory differences may not invariably limit adaptive function in preterm children.

    “Our data do not support our second hypothesis and suggest that sensory differences may not invariably limit adaptive function in preterm children.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Working memory influences visual selective attention and exerts top-down control on neural activity in the visual cortex.

    “For example, working memory has been demonstrated to influence visual selective attention [32] and to exert top-down control on neural activity in the visual cortex [22].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [32] de Fockert JW Rees G Frith CD Lavie N The role of working memory in visual selective attention Science 2001 291 5509 1803 6 11230699 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [22] Kastner S Ungerleider LG Mechanisms of visual attention in the human cortex Annu Rev Neurosci 2000 23 315 41 10845067 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The significant association between sensory processing and executive function, and the similarity of items on the measures, calls into question whether sensory processing and executive function are distinct or overlapping constructs.

    “The significant association between sensory processing and executive function, and the similarity of the items on the respective measures, calls into question whether sensory processing and executive function are distinct or overlapping constructs.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Executive function can exert top-down control over sensory processing and influence which sensory stimuli gain conscious awareness.

    “It is likely that executive function can also exert top-down control over sensory processing and influence which sensory stimuli gain conscious awareness [21, 22].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [21] Shimamura AP The role of the prefrontal cortex in dynamic filtering Psychobiology 2000 28 2 207 18 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [22] Kastner S Ungerleider LG Mechanisms of visual attention in the human cortex Annu Rev Neurosci 2000 23 315 41 10845067 source

      Not checked in the free run.

37 of 37

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    No prior study has specifically assessed sensory processing in preterm preschoolers.

    “To our knowledge, sensory processing has not been evaluated specifically in preterm preschoolers, though the preschool period is important for consolidating development in multiple domains including communication, social development, and pre-academic skills.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The link between sensory processing and other domains, such as executive and adaptive function, has not been studied in preterm preschoolers.

    “The relationship between sensory processing in preterm preschoolers and other domains potentially impacted by sensory processing, specifically executive function and adaptive function, has not been investigated.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Preschool is a critical period for development across communication, social, and pre-academic domains.

    “To our knowledge, sensory processing has not been evaluated specifically in preterm preschoolers, though the preschool period is important for consolidating development in multiple domains including communication, social development, and pre-academic skills.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    This study is the first to specifically evaluate sensory processing in preterm preschoolers.

    “To our knowledge, this study is the first to specifically evaluate sensory processing in preterm preschoolers.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The Gift Wrap task measures the executive function domain of inhibition.

    “The Gift Wrap task measures the executive function domain of inhibition, which has been theorized to be an important component in sensory processing [22].”
5 of 5

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A strong and positive correlation has been observed between difficulties in sensory processing and executive function deficits in various populations, such as premature children, children with autism spectrum disorders, and children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

    “A strong and positive correlation has also been observed between difficulties in sensory processing and executive function deficits in various populations, such as premature children (21–23), children with ASDs (24–26), and children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (27–29).”

    From Assessment of Sensory Processing and Executive Functions in Childhood: Development, Reliability, and Validity of the EPYFEI (2018) · cites this paper as [21]

Statistics that don’t add up

Each reported p-value recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom.

  • Inconsistent p-value: X2(1) = 10.75, p < .001

    Minor

    The paper reports p < .001 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .001. The check cannot tell whether the statistic or the p-value is the misprint.

    Reported p < .001 · recomputed p = .001

1 of 1

Statistics recomputed

Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.

  • Doesn’t add upχ²(1) = 10.75reported p < .001 · recomputed p = .001

    “X2(1) = 10.75, p < .001”

  • Consistentχ²(1) = 1.36reported p = .24 · recomputed p = .244

    “X2(1) = 1.36, p = .24”

  • Consistentt(125) = 4.4reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “t(125) = 4.40, p < .001”

  • Consistentz = -3.42reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “z = −3.42, p < .001”

  • Consistentχ²(1) = 5.68reported p = .02 · recomputed p = .017

    “X2(1) = 5.68, p = .02”

  • Consistentt(47) = 1.45reported p = .15 · recomputed p = .154

    “t(47) = 1.45, p = .15”

6 of 6

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Self-check results appear here once an independent check has confirmed them.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 36 · Cited by 85

Authors
Adams, J. N., Feldman, H. M., Huffman, L. C., & Loe, I. M.
Affiliations
Stanford Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Loe, Irene M.
ORCID
Venue
Early Human Development
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-03
Volume
91
Issue
3
Pages
227-233
ISSN
0378-3782 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2015.01.013
PMC
PMC4392005
OpenAlex
W2140493476
Semantic Scholar
a8d0a541dbb92724374410595a7551d1a8574b8f
Cited by
85
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 1
FWCI
4.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Early Human Development (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Child Health Research Institute
  • Lucile Packard Foundation for Children's Health (1111239-128-JHACT)
  • Society for Developmental–Behavioral Pediatrics
  • National Institutes of Health (K23HD071971)
  • Stanford Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) (UL1 TR0001085)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Infant Development and Preterm Care
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
Keywords
sensory processing, preterm birth, executive function, adaptive behavior, Short Sensory Profile, Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function, Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, full-term comparison, early childhood development
MeSH terms
Adult, Child, Child, Preschool, Female, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Infant, Premature, Male, Perception, Sensation, Case-Control Studies, Executive Function

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-06.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-06.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review