↓ Skip to main content

Predicting developmental outcomes in premature infants by term equivalent MRI: systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Predicting developmental outcomes in premature infants by term equivalent MRI: systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Systematic Reviews, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13643-015-0058-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Janneke van’t Hooft, Johanna H. van der Lee, Brent C. Opmeer, Cornelieke S. H. Aarnoudse-Moens, Arnold G. E. Leenders, Ben Willem J. Mol, Timo R. de Haan

Abstract

This study aims to determine the prognostic accuracy of term MRI in very preterm born (≤32 weeks) or low-birth-weight (≤1500 g) infants for long-term (>18 months) developmental outcomes. We performed a systematic review searching Central, Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo. Two independent reviewers performed study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment. We documented sensitivity and specificity for three different MRI findings (white matter abnormalities (WMA), brain abnormality (BA), and diffuse excessive high signal intensity (DEHSI)), related to developmental outcomes including cerebral palsy (CP), visual and/or hearing problems, motor, neurocognitive, and behavioral function. Using bivariate meta-analysis, we estimated pooled sensitivity and specificity and plotted summary receiver operating characteristic (sROC) curves for different cut-offs of MRI. We included 20 papers published between 2000 and 2013. Quality of included studies varied. Pooled sensitivity and specificity values (95 % confidence interval (CI)) for prediction of CP combining the three different MRI findings (using normal/mild vs. moderate/severe cut-off) were 77 % (53 to 91 %) and 79 % (51 to 93 %), respectively. For prediction of motor function, the values were 72 % (52 to 86 %) and 62 % (29 to 87 %), respectively. Prognostic accuracy for visual and/or hearing problems, neurocognitive, and/or behavioral function was poor. sROC curves of the individual MRI findings showed that presence of WMA provided the best prognostic accuracy whereas DEHSI did not show any potential prognostic accuracy. This study shows that presence of moderate/severe WMA on MRI around term equivalent age can predict CP and motor function in very preterm or low-birth-weight infants with moderate sensitivity and specificity. Its ability to predict other long-term outcomes such as neurocognitive and behavioral impairments is limited. Also, other white matter related tests as BA and DEHSI demonstrated limited prognostic value. PROSPERO CRD42013006362.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 104 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 21%
Student > Master 21 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 9%
Other 7 7%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 10 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 33%
Neuroscience 19 18%
Psychology 13 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 17 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 May 2015.
All research outputs
#4,040,268
of 8,081,958 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#463
of 642 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,409
of 218,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#26
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,081,958 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 642 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 218,355 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.