Cited by 74Infant Development and Preterm CareMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFamily and Disability Support Research

Long-term benefits of home-based preventive care for preterm infants: A randomized trial

Spencer-Smith, Megan M., Spittle, Alicia J., Doyle, Lex W., Lee, Katherine J., Lorefice, Lucy, Suetin, Anastasiya, Pascoe, Leona, Anderson, Peter J.·2012·Pediatrics

Abstract

Background We have previously reported improved caregiver mental health and infant behavior at 2 years following a home-based preventive care program for very preterm infants and their caregivers. This study aimed to determine the longer-term effectiveness of the program by reviewing caregivers and children at preschool age. Methods One hundred twenty very preterm infants ( Results At age 4 years, 105 (89%) children were reviewed. There was little evidence of differences in cognitive or motor functioning between groups. The intervention group had lower scores for child internalizing behaviors than the control group (mean difference -5.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] -9.6 to -0.9, P = .02). Caregivers in the intervention group had fewer anxiety symptoms (mean difference -1.8, 95% CI -3.3 to -0.4, P = .01) and were less likely to exhibit "at-risk" anxiety (odds ratio 0.3, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.7, P = .01) than those in the control group. Conclusions This home-based preventive care program for very preterm infants has selective long-term benefits, including less caregiver anxiety and reduced preschooler internalizing behaviors.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1542/peds.2012-0426

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Compared to the control group, children in the intervention group had lower scores for internalizing behaviors at age 4.

    “Furthermore, compared to the control group, children in the intervention group had lower scores for internalizing behaviors at age 4 (Spencer-Smith et al., 2012) and higher physical well-being at age 9 (Landsem et al., 2015).”

    From Scoping review of interventions to support families with preterm infants post-NICU discharge (2022) · cites this paper as Spencer-Smith et al., 2012

  • There was no significant difference in cognitive and motor functioning outcomes at age 4, 7, and 9.

    “On the other hand, there was no significant difference in the cognitive and motor functioning outcomes at age 4, 7 and 9 (Hauglann et al., 2015; Spencer-Smith et al., 2012).”

    From Scoping review of interventions to support families with preterm infants post-NICU discharge (2022) · cites this paper as Spencer-Smith et al., 2012

  • There was no evidence of long-term effect at age 4, 7 and 9 for cognitive and motor functioning outcomes.

    “However, there was no evidence of long-term effect at age 4, 7 and 9 for cognitive and motor functioning outcomes (Hauglann et al., 2015; Spencer-Smith et al., 2012).”

    From Scoping review of interventions to support families with preterm infants post-NICU discharge (2022) · cites this paper as Spencer-Smith et al., 2012

  • The investigators examined the longitudinal effects of the post-NICU discharge intervention at age 4, 7 and 9.

    “Additionally, the investigators examined the longitudinal effects of the post-NICU discharge intervention at age 4, 7 and 9 (Hauglann et al., 2015; Landsem et al., 2015; Spencer-Smith et al., 2012).”

    From Scoping review of interventions to support families with preterm infants post-NICU discharge (2022) · cites this paper as Spencer-Smith et al., 2012

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Spencer-Smith, M. M., Spittle, A. J., Doyle, L. W., Lee, K. J., Lorefice, L., Suetin, A., Pascoe, L., & Anderson, P. J.
Affiliations
  • Critical Care and Neurosciences, Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Victoria, Australia;
  • Murdoch Children's Research Institute (AU)
  • Royal Women's Hospital (AU)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
Venue
Pediatrics
Published
2012-12-01
Volume
130
Issue
6
Pages
1094-1101
ISSN
  • 0031-4005 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-4275
OpenAlex
W2137163191
Cited by
74
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
7.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • PEDIATRICS (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Swinburne figshare (Swinburne University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Infant Development and Preterm Care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Maternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Family and Disability Support Research
Keywords
very preterm infants, home visits, caregiver mental health, caregiver anxiety, internalizing problems, preschool children, child cognitive development, motor development, parent-infant relationship, long-term outcomes
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Anxiety, Child Behavior Disorders, Child, Preschool, Cognition Disorders, Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Infant, Premature, Diseases, Internal-External Control, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Parent-Child Relations, Psychometrics, Psychomotor Disorders, Surveys and Questionnaires, Caregivers, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Home Care Services, Hospital-Based, Infant, Very Low Birth Weight

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