4.4 Article

Object exploration in extremely preterm infants between 6 and 9 months and relation to cognitive and language development at 24 months

期刊

RESEARCH IN DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES
卷 68, 期 -, 页码 140-152

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ridd.2017.06.002

关键词

Preterm infants; Object exploration; First year of life; Fine motor abilities; Precursors of cognitive and language development

资金

  1. Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research [2008J2WEEK]
  2. University of Bologna [2007-STRATO7SAN]
  3. Cucciolo Associazione in Bologna dei Genitori dei Bambini nati pretermine (Association in Bologna of parents of preterm children)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although early object exploration is considered a key ability for subsequent achievements, very few studies have analyzed its development in extremely low gestational age infants (ELGA-GA < 28 weeks), whose early motor skills are delayed. Moreover, no studies have examined its developmental relationship with cognitive and language skills. The present study examined developmental change in Motor Object Exploration (MOE) and different types of MOE (Holding, Oral, Manual and Manual Rhythmic Exploration) in 20 ELGA and 20 full term (FT) infants observed during mother-infant play interaction at 6 and 9 months. It also explored whether specific types of MOE were longitudinally related to 24-month language and cognitive abilities (GMDS-R scores). ELGA infants increased MOE duration from 6 to 9 months, eliminating the initial difference with FT infants. In addition, ELGA infants showed a different pattern of Oral Exploration, that did not increase at 6 months and decrease at 9 months. Oral and Manual Exploration durations at 6 months were longitudinally related to 24-month GMDS-R language and cognitive performance scores respectively. We discuss the relevance of assessing early exploratory abilities in ELGA infants in order to implement customized intervention programs for supporting the development of these skills.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据