TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of the predictive validity of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale and Infant Neurological International Battery in low-birth-weight infants
T2 - a prospective longitudinal study
AU - Narayan, Amitesh
AU - Anand, Polisetti Siva Sai
AU - Karnad, Shreekanth D.
AU - Alammari, Abdulaziz
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 Wroclaw University of Health and Sport Sciences.
PY - 2025
Y1 - 2025
N2 - Introduction. This study aims to test the predictive validity of the Infant Neurological International Battery (INFANIB) and the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) against the Peabody Developmental Motor Scale-2 (PDMS-2) at 4, 8 and 12 months of age in low birth weight (LBW) infants. Methods. Motor development in 18 LBW infants was examined prospectively at 4, 8 and 12 months. A professional investigator assessed the motor development of these infants using the AIMS, INFANIB and PDMS-2. The validity of the results was assessed using Friedman and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests on the total raw scores of PDMS-2, AIMS and INFANIB at the three distinct age points. The chi-square test was used to calculate the association between INFANIB and AIMS with PDMS-2 for normal and LBW infants at each age point. Results. The INFANIB and AIMS scores were both associated with PDMS-2 at all three age points. However, INFANIB demonstrated a higher predictive validity for PDMS-2 in LBW infants than AIMS. Conclusions. The INFANIB has greater predictive validity than AIMS for assessing motor outcomes in LBW infants at 4, 8 and 12 months.
AB - Introduction. This study aims to test the predictive validity of the Infant Neurological International Battery (INFANIB) and the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) against the Peabody Developmental Motor Scale-2 (PDMS-2) at 4, 8 and 12 months of age in low birth weight (LBW) infants. Methods. Motor development in 18 LBW infants was examined prospectively at 4, 8 and 12 months. A professional investigator assessed the motor development of these infants using the AIMS, INFANIB and PDMS-2. The validity of the results was assessed using Friedman and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests on the total raw scores of PDMS-2, AIMS and INFANIB at the three distinct age points. The chi-square test was used to calculate the association between INFANIB and AIMS with PDMS-2 for normal and LBW infants at each age point. Results. The INFANIB and AIMS scores were both associated with PDMS-2 at all three age points. However, INFANIB demonstrated a higher predictive validity for PDMS-2 in LBW infants than AIMS. Conclusions. The INFANIB has greater predictive validity than AIMS for assessing motor outcomes in LBW infants at 4, 8 and 12 months.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105008816221
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105008816221#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.5114/pq/188340
DO - 10.5114/pq/188340
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:105008816221
SN - 1230-8323
VL - 33
SP - 39
EP - 44
JO - Physiotherapy Quarterly
JF - Physiotherapy Quarterly
IS - 2
ER -