Cited by 93Infant Development and Preterm CareNeonatal and fetal brain pathologyChild and Adolescent Health

Implementation of the Hammersmith Infant Neurological Examination in a High-Risk Infant Follow-Up Program

Open access
Maitre, Nathalie L., Chorna, Olena, Romeo, Domenico M., Guzzetta, Andrea·2016·Pediatric Neurology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: High-risk infant follow-up programs provide early identification and referral for treatment of neurodevelopmental delays and impairments. In these programs, a standardized neurological examination is a critical component of evaluation for clinical and research purposes. METHODS: To address primary challenges of provider educational diversity and standardized documentation, we designed an approach to training and implementation of the Hammersmith Infant Neurological Examination with precourse materials, a workshop model, and adaptation of the electronic medical record. CONCLUSIONS: Provider completion and documentation of a neurological examination were evaluated before and after Hammersmith Infant Neurological Examination training. Standardized training and implementation of the Hammersmith Infant Neurological Examination in a large high-risk infant follow-up is feasible and effective and allows for quantitative evaluation of neurological findings and developmental trajectories.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2016.09.010

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [43]Amiel-Tison C Update of the Amiel-Tison neurologic assessment for the term neonate or at 40 weeks corrected age Pediatric Neurology 2002 27 196 212 10.1016/S0887-8994(02)00436-8 12393130 · DOI
  2. [44]International Conference on Cerebral Palsy and other Childhood-onset Disabilities 2016 http://eacd2016.org/2016 accessed 08.01.16

Cited by

Authors
Maitre, N. L., Chorna, O., Romeo, D. M., & Guzzetta, A.
Affiliations
  • Nationwide Children's Hospital (US)
  • Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore (IT)
  • University of Pisa (IT)
Corresponding author
Maitre, Nathalie L.
Venue
Pediatric Neurology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-12
Volume
65
Pages
31-38
ISSN
0887-8994 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2521215115
Cited by
93
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 1
FWCI
6.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Pediatric Neurology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • CINECA IRIS Institutial research information system (University of Pisa) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (1 K23 HD074736, 1R01HD081120-01A1)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Infant Development and Preterm Care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Neonatal and fetal brain pathology
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Child and Adolescent Health
Keywords
Hammersmith Infant Neurological Examination, high-risk infants, neurodevelopmental delay, provider training, documentation standardization
MeSH terms
Child, Preschool, Education, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Infant, Premature, Male, Neurologic Examination, Physicians, Surveys and Questionnaires, Risk Factors, Program Development, Infant, Very Low Birth Weight, Electronic Health Records, Neurodevelopmental Disorders

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.

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