Back

Effects of interdisciplinary early developmental intervention programs on behavior, executive functioning and participation in children born preterm: A systematic review with meta-analysis

Schirle, L.; Babel, M.; Briem, J.-S. J.; Gawehn, N.; Janka, H.; Metzendorf, M.-I.; Trunk, E.; Wohlleben, J.; Weibel, S.; Spiegler, J.

2026-06-03 pediatrics
10.64898/2026.06.02.26354617 medRxiv
Show abstract

Aim: To systematically evaluate evidence on the effects of post-discharge early developmental intervention programs (EI) on behavioral development, quality of life, participation, executive functioning, parent-child interaction, and use of medical services from infancy through adolescence in children born preterm. Method: Four bibliographic databases and one trial registry were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials up to April 23, 2024. Two reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data. In clinically and methodologically comparable studies, random-effects meta-analysis were performed. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane RoB 2 tool, and certainty of evidence with the GRADE approach. Results: Twenty-six studies met inclusion criteria, eleven studies including 2,315 preterm born infants reported relevant outcomes, and seven contributed to meta-analyses. Most reported results showed some concerns or high risk of bias; certainty of evidence ranged from very low to moderate across outcomes. EI may offer small benefits for selective attention, behavioral problems and parent-child interaction. Little to no effect was found for special educational needs, language skills, executive functioning and the use of medical services. No included studies evaluated the effect of EI on ADHD, quality of life, or participation related to mobility or leisure activities. Interpretation: EI may improve problems typically seen in preterm children and should be offered especially to those with additional medical or social risk factors. High-quality, contemporary trials are needed to establish reliable clinical recommendations regarding EI strategies and complementary interventions throughout childhood.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.