PEDIATRICS Vol. 35 No. 3 March 1965, pp. 425-433
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow P3Rs: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when P3Rs are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Robinson, N. M.
Right arrow Articles by Robinson, H. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Robinson, N. M.
Right arrow Articles by Robinson, H. B.

A FOLLOW-UP STUDY OF CHILDREN OF LOW BIRTH WEIGHT AND CONTROL CHILDREN AT SCHOOL AGE

Nancy M. Robinson Ph.D.1 and Halbert B. Robinson Ph.D.1

1 Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

A comprehensive follow-up of survivors of matched groups of low- and mature-birth-weight infants born in Wake County, North Carolina, was carried out when the children were approximately 8 to 10 years old. The sample included 92 who had weighed more than 2,500 gm at birth, 102 with birth weights of 1.501-2,500 gm, and 33 who had weighed 1,500 gm or less. Covariance techniques were utilized to hold background factors constant in some of the analyses. A higher proportion of the tiniest infants had sustained major physical defects (24% vs. 2-3% in other groups). This group was significantly smaller in weight and head size, and tended to come from more disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds. Extensive comparisons of data from physical and psychological examinations, social histories, and school reports tended to find only a few significant differences among the groups, all of which were probably related more closely to social background than to birth weight per se. The data indicate that, aside from physical size and major physical defects, social class assumes much more importance than does birth weight in determining a child's developmental prognosis.

Submitted on July 27, 1964
Accepted on September 30, 1964




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JAMAHome page
R. Neugebauer, H. W. Hoek, and E. Susser
Prenatal Exposure to Wartime Famine and Development of Antisocial Personality Disorder in Early Adulthood
JAMA, August 4, 1999; 282(5): 455 - 462.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 International Journal of Behavioral DevelopmentHome page
M. Grigoroiu-Serbanescu
Intellectual and Emotional Development and School Adjustment in Preterm Children at 6 and 7 Years of Age. Continuation of a Follow-Up Study
International Journal of Behavioral Development, September 1, 1984; 7(3): 307 - 320.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 International Journal of Behavioral DevelopmentHome page
M. Grigoroiu-Serbanescu
Intellectual and Emotional Development in Premature Children from 1 to 5 Years
International Journal of Behavioral Development, June 1, 1981; 4(2): 183 - 199.
[Abstract] [PDF]