Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
, 150 (8), 790-4

Extremely Low-Birth-Weight Children and Their Peers. A Comparison of School-Age Outcomes

Comparative Study

Extremely Low-Birth-Weight Children and Their Peers. A Comparison of School-Age Outcomes

C L Halsey et al. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med.


Objective: To document 7-year developmental and educational outcomes in a cohort of predominantly white, middle-class, extremely low-birth-weight (ELBW, < 1000 g) children to address the incidence of increased developmental disability and the need for special educational services.

Design: Observational study.

Patients: Fifty-four ELBW children and 58 comparison children, who were matched for race, gender, and socio-economic status (30 with low birth weights [1500-2500 g] and 28 with birth weights > 2500 g). The ELBW cohort was drawn from 104 presurfactant survivors born between 1984 and 1986 and cared for in a single hospital.

Setting: Suburban, university-based tertiary referral center.

Main outcome measures: Teachers' reports of classroom placement and special education services and tests of cognitive, motor, language, and visual-motor integration abilities were studied.

Results: Twenty-seven (50%) of 54 ELBW children were in regular classrooms with no special services compared with 21 (70%) of 30 in the low-birth-weight group and 27 (93%) of 28 in the full-term group, indicating a significant trend toward increasing need for special services with decreasing birth weight across the 3 groups (P < .001). The ELBW group scored significantly lower than the comparison groups on all tests, although generally within the average range. Seventy-nine percent of ELBW children had average cognitive scores, but they averaged 14 to 17 points lower than the 2 comparison groups. Twenty percent of the ELBW children had significant disabilities including cerebral palsy, mental retardation, autism, and low intelligence with severe learning problems.

Conclusions: Even with optimal socioeconomic environments, 20% of ELBW children are significantly disabled, and 1 of every 2 ELBW children requires special educational services. Objective testing pinpointed weakness on all measures compared with matched peer groups.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 9 PubMed Central articles

See all "Cited by" articles

Publication types