2019
DOI: 10.1080/09540121.2019.1637506
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Neurodevelopmental and behavioural outcomes of HIV-exposed uninfected and HIV-unexposed children at 2–3 years of age in Cape Town, South Africa

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
45
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(48 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
3
45
0
Order By: Relevance
“…One study reported lower cognitive developmental scores for infants who were HEU compared to HUU; however, these differences did not persist after controlling for maternal substance use [47]. Cognitive developmental delay was often more prevalent among infants who were HEU at 12-13 months [49,56] compared to HUU but may not persist to three years of age [53]. One study reported that in comparison to reference norms, a higher proportion of infants who were HEU had average, higher average, and superior performance on measures of cognitive outcomes [54].…”
Section: Cognitive Outcomesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…One study reported lower cognitive developmental scores for infants who were HEU compared to HUU; however, these differences did not persist after controlling for maternal substance use [47]. Cognitive developmental delay was often more prevalent among infants who were HEU at 12-13 months [49,56] compared to HUU but may not persist to three years of age [53]. One study reported that in comparison to reference norms, a higher proportion of infants who were HEU had average, higher average, and superior performance on measures of cognitive outcomes [54].…”
Section: Cognitive Outcomesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the nine studies that included analyses on early life nutrition-related variables and infant neurodevelopment, cohort characteristics and comparison groups based on nutritional intervention (if relevant) are reported in Figure 2. Within these nine studies, two reported data on longitudinal neurodevelopmental assessments (for cognitive (n = 2), motor (n = 2), and language (n = 1) outcomes) [50,51], and seven reported cross-sectional assessment data (for cognitive (n = 7), motor (n = 7), language (n = 7), and behavioural (n = 3) outcomes) [52][53][54][55][56][57][58]. [34] of studies reporting on neurodevelopmental outcomes in infants in relation to HIV-exposure status.…”
Section: Study Location Demographics and Designmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Numerous instruments have been developed for the assessment of child development based on age, domains tested, and type (performance based, self/caregiver rating). Unlike in adult TBM, these have been extensively reviewed elsewhere in published literature including comparison of available tests and suitability for use in LMIC settings 100,101 . Although there is no consensus or consistency on the measures used to assess outcome post TBM in infants and children, ideal testing requires wide age-range; the ability to measure floor and ceiling effects as some of the children are left with very low residual function, and needs to assess fine and gross motor ability, receptive and expressive language as well as behavioural, social and adaptive skills.…”
Section: Paediatricsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A number of recent studies have suggested that CHEU may be more likely to experience delay or disability in neurocognitive or language development compared to children who are HIV-unexposed and uninfected (CHUU) (le Roux et al, 2018(le Roux et al, , 2019McHenry et al, 2018;Mukherjee, Devamare, Seth, & Sapra, 2019;Wedderburn et al, 2019;Wu et al, 2018). However, conflicting evidence from methodologically similar studies indicates that developmental scores among CHEU do not differ from those of CHUU (McHenry et al, 2018;Boivin et al, 2018;Desmonde, Goetghebuer, Thorne, & Leroy, 2018;Springer et al, 2018Springer et al, , 2019. Many of the studies to date have been limited by small sample size, differing recruitment and eligibility criteria for the CHEU, CHUU, and CLHIV groups, and/or lack of adjustment for potentially confounding variables, such as household food insecurity or lower education.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%