PEDIATRICS Vol. 91 No. 4 April 1993, pp. 807-811
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
Right arrow Citation Map
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 Halsey, C. L.
Right arrow Articles by Collin, M. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Halsey, C. L.
Right arrow Articles by Collin, M. F.

Extremely Low Birth Weight Children and Their Peers: A Comparison of Preschool Performance

Carey L. Halsey MSEd1, Craig L. Anderson MD1, and Marc F. Collin MD2

1 From the Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL
2 From the Metro-Health Medical Center, Cleveland, OH.

Though not well studied, extremely low birth weight (ELBW; (1000 g) appears to be a major risk factor for developmental disability, with most affected children experiencing school problems (40% to 64%) rather than severe handicap (25%). This study marks the first published US attempt to document prospectively the developmental/educational progress of a cohort of predominantly white, middle-class ELBW children with randomly selected and matched heavier birth weight (1500 through 2500 g and >2500 g) peer comparison groups. Sixty ELBW children and 60 peers were administered a test battery at age 4 years, including the McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities, Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, and Beery Test of Visual-Motor Integration. The ELBW group mean scores were significantly lower than those of the peer groups on every measure, although generally still within 1 SD of the test mean. Twenty-three percent were clearly disabled; 26% had optimal development, having attained at least average scores on all measures; and 51% attained borderline scores globally or had an average cognitive score, but specifically poor performance in one or more areas. Comparison groups were 2frac12 times more likely to have optimal development and had mean cognitive scores 15 to 18 points higher than the ELBW group. In summary, weaker performance on all measures exists prior to school entry among nondisabled ELBW children compared with their peers. It is unclear whether these data portend emerging school-based disabilities or describe a continuing recovery process to be completed in middle childhood. Continued follow-up of this cohort at 7 and 10 years of age will address these questions.

Key Words: extremely low birth weight • developmental follow-up • neonatology • prematurity

Submitted on August 21, 1992
Accepted on December 16, 1992




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Topics in Early Childhood Special EducationHome page
T. L. Stanton-Chapman, D. A. Chapman, A. P. Kaiser, and T. B. Hancock
Cumulative Risk and Low-Income Children's Language Development
Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, January 1, 2004; 24(4): 227 - 237.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed.Home page
V Tommiska, K Heinonen, P Kero, M-L Pokela, O Tammela, A-L Jarvenpaa, T Salokorpi, M Virtanen, V Fellman, and N Marlow
A national two year follow up study of extremely low birthweight infants born in 1996-1997
Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed., January 1, 2003; 88(1): F29 - 35.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed.Home page
C M Wheatley, J L Dickinson, D A Mackey, J E Craig, and M M Sale
Retinopathy of prematurity: recent advances in our understanding
Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed., September 1, 2002; 87(2): F78 - 82.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br. J. Ophthalmol.Home page
C M Wheatley, J L Dickinson, D A Mackey, J E Craig, and M M Sale
Retinopathy of prematurity: recent advances in our understanding
Br. J. Ophthalmol., June 1, 2002; 86(6): 696 - 700.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed.Home page
V Tommiska, M Ostberg, and V Fellman
Parental stress in families of 2 year old extremely low birthweight infants
Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed., May 1, 2002; 86(3): F161 - F164.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 PediatricsHome page
B. R. Vohr, L. L. Wright, A. M. Dusick, L. Mele, J. Verter, J. J. Steichen, N. P. Simon, D. C. Wilson, S. Broyles, C. R. Bauer, et al.
Neurodevelopmental and Functional Outcomes of Extremely Low Birth Weight Infants in the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network, 1993-1994
Pediatrics, June 1, 2000; 105(6): 1216 - 1226.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 PediatricsHome page
M. B. Resnick, R. V. Gueorguieva, R. L. Carter, M. Ariet, Y. Sun, J. Roth, R. L. Bucciarelli, J. S. Curran, and C. S. Mahan
The Impact of Low Birth Weight, Perinatal Conditions, and Sociodemographic Factors on Educational Outcome in Kindergarten
Pediatrics, December 1, 1999; 104(6): 74e - 74.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 PediatricsHome page
M. B. Resnick, S. V. Gomatam, R. L. Carter, M. Ariet, J. Roth, K. L. Kilgore, R. L. Bucciarelli, C. S. Mahan, J. S. Curran, and D. V. Eitzman
Educational Disabilities of Neonatal Intensive Care Graduates
Pediatrics, August 1, 1998; 102(2): 308 - 314.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]