The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Do early intervention programmes improve cognitive and motor outcomes for preterm infants after discharge? A systematic review
Open accessAbstract
Aim The aim of this study was to review the effects of early developmental intervention after discharge from hospital on motor and cognitive development in preterm infants. Method Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi‐RCTs of early developmental intervention programmes for preterm infants in which motor or cognitive outcomes were reported and in which the intervention commenced before or after discharge were included. A systematic review and meta‐analysis of studies grouped by intervention, age of outcome, and study quality was undertaken. Databases searched (up to January 2009) included the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Embase. Results Eighteen studies met the inclusion criteria (2686 patients randomized), but only 11 studies had data suitable for meta‐analysis. Early developmental intervention improved cognitive outcomes at infant age (developmental quotient: standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33–0.52; p<0.001), and at preschool age (IQ: SMD 0.46, 95% CI 0.33–0.59; p<0.001). However, the benefit was not sustained at school age (IQ: SMD 0.02, 95% CI –0.10 to 0.14; p=0.71). Early intervention had little effect on motor outcome at infant or school age, and there was no study reporting motor outcome at preschool age. Interpretation Current evidence suggests that the benefits of developmental intervention postdischarge are restricted to short‐term gains in cognitive outcome.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Cognitive and Behavioral Outcomes of School-Aged Children Who Were Born Preterm: A Meta-analysis
Bhutta, A. T., Cleves, M. A., Casey, P. H., Cradock, M. M., & Anand, K. J. S. (2002) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.288.6.728 · Cited by 2,392
BLAIR, C. (2002) · Development and Psychopathology · doi:10.1017/s0954579402002079 · Cited by 150
Kaaresen, P. I., Rønning, J. A., Tunby, J., Nordhov, S. M., Ulvund, S. E., & Dahl, L. B. (2008) · Early Human Development · doi:10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2007.07.003 · Cited by 135
Cited by
Benzies, K. M., Magill-Evans, J. E., Hayden, K., & Ballantyne, M. (2013) · BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · doi:10.1186/1471-2393-13-s1-s10 · Cited by 385
Enriched environments and motor outcomes in cerebral palsy: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Morgan, C., Novak, I., & Badawi, N. (2013) · PEDIATRICS · doi:10.1542/peds.2012-3985 · Cited by 207
Puthussery, S., Chutiyami, M., Tseng, P.-C., Kilby, L., & Kapadia, J. (2018) · BMC Pediatrics · doi:10.1186/s12887-018-1205-9 · Cited by 140
Turpin, H., Urben, S., Ansermet, F., Borghini, A., Murray, M. M., & Müller-Nix, C. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-36465-2 · Cited by 45
Which high‐risk infants should we follow‐up and how should we do it?
Walker, K., Holland, A. J., Halliday, R., & Badawi, N. (2012) · Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health · doi:10.1111/j.1440-1754.2012.02540.x · Cited by 35
Metadata
- Authors
- ORTON, J., SPITTLE, A., DOYLE, L., ANDERSON, P., & BOYD, R.
- Venue
- Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-10
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 851-859
- ISSN
- 0012-1622 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-8749
- OpenAlex
- W2123477170
- Cited by
- 241
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 1.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Do early intervention programmes improve cognitive and motor outcomes for preterm infants after discharge? A systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2009.03414.x
- The paper
- ORTON, J., SPITTLE, A., DOYLE, L., ANDERSON, P., & BOYD, R. (2009). Do early intervention programmes improve cognitive and motor outcomes for preterm infants after discharge? A systematic review. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2009.03414.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.