Construction and validation of the Oxford Neurodevelopment Assessment (OX-NDA) in 1-year-old Brazilian children.

BACKGROUND: Over 250 million children under 5 years, globally, are at risk of developmental delay. Interventions during the first 2 years of life have enduring positive effects if children at risk are identified, using standardized assessments, within this window. However, identifying developmental delay during infancy is challenging and there are limited infant development assessments suitable for use in low- and middle-income (LMIC) settings. Here, we describe a new tool, the Oxford Neurodevelopment Assessment (OX-NDA), measuring cognition, language, motor, and behaviour, outcomes in 1-year-old children. We present the results of its evaluation against the Bayley Scales of Infant Development IIIrd edition (BSID-III) and its psychometric properties. METHODS: Sixteen international tools measuring infant development were analysed to inform the OX-NDA's construction. Its agreement with the BSID-III, for cognitive, motor and language domains, was evaluated using intra-class correlations (ICCs, for absolute agreement), Bland-Altman analyses (for bias and limits of agreement), and sensitivity and specificity analyses (for accuracy) in 104 Brazilian children, aged 12 months (SD 8.4 days), recruited from the 2015 Pelotas Birth Cohort Study. Behaviour was not evaluated, as the BSID-III's adaptive behaviour scale was not included in the cohort's protocol. Cohen's kappas and Cronbach's alphas were calculated to determine the OX-NDA's reliability and internal consistency respectively. RESULTS: Agreement was moderate for cognition and motor outcomes (ICCs 0.63 and 0.68, p < 0.001) and low for language outcomes (ICC 0.30, p < 0.04). Bland-Altman analysis showed little to no bias between measures across domains. The OX-NDA's sensitivity and specificity for predicting moderate-to-severe delay on the BSID-III was 76, 73 and 43% and 75, 80 and 33% for cognition, motor and language outcomes, respectively. Inter-rater (k = 0.80-0.96) and test-rest (k = 0.85-0.94) reliability was high for all domains. Administration time was < 20 minutes. CONCLUSION: The OX-NDA shows moderate agreement with the BSID-III for identifying infants at risk of cognitive and motor delay; agreement was low for language delay. It is a rapid, low-cost assessment constructed specifically for use in LMIC populations. Further work is needed to evaluate its use (i) across domains in populations beyond Brazil and (ii) to identify language delays in Brazilian children.

Effect of Parental Counseling on Infants' Healthy Sleep Habits in Brazil: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Poor sleep during early childhood is associated with adverse outcomes, including obesity, cognitive impairment, and mental and behavioral disorders. Objective: To assess the efficacy of an educational intervention in the promotion of nighttime sleep duration. Design, Setting, and Participants: This single-blind, intent-to-treat randomized clinical trial included participants in Pelotas, Brazil, aged 3 months who were followed up until age 24 months. Eligibility criteria included healthy infants aged approximately 3 months who slept less than 15 hours per 24 hours. Infants were randomized to the intervention group or control group. Interventions: Information on sleep characteristics, improvements in the environment, establishment of a nighttime sleep routine, and waiting before attending nocturnal awakenings was delivered to mothers in the intervention group by trained home-visitors at baseline. The intervention group received a telephone call on the first and second day after the intervention and a home visit on the third day after the intervention. The intervention's content was reinforced at health care visits for ages 6 months and 12 months. Mothers allocated to the control group were counseled on the benefits of breastfeeding for the mother's and child's health and given written material with content on breastfeeding. Main Outcomes and Measures: Nighttime sleep duration was measured by interview and actigraphy at baseline and ages 6, 12, and 24 months and diaries at baseline and age 6 months. At ages 3 and 6 months, nighttime sleep self-regulation was calculated by subtracting nighttime sleep duration recorded by actigraphy from nighttime sleep duration recorded in the diaries and at ages 12 and 24 months by subtracting nighttime sleep duration recorded by actigraphy from nighttime sleep duration obtained by interview. Results: Among 1812 mother-infant dyads invited to participate, 798 met the inclusion criteria and 586 agreed to participate. The intervention group included 298 infants (154 [52.9%] boys), and the control group included 288 infants (164 [58.2%] boys). At age 6 months, mean (SD) nighttime sleep duration recorded in diaries was 9.80 (1.85) hours in the intervention group and 9.49 (2.07) hours in the control group, a difference of 19 minutes longer for the intervention group. At age 12 months, mean (SD) nighttime sleep duration based on the Brief Infant Sleep Questionnaire was 8.43 (1.35) hours in the intervention group and 8.52 (1.35) hours in the control group, a difference of 5 minutes shorter for the intervention group. At age 24 months, compared with information from the interview, actigraphy records showed that children in the intervention group stayed awake at night without signalizing for a mean (SD) of 0.52 (2.52) hours, whereas children in the control group stayed awake at night without signalizing for a mean (SD) of 0.23 (2.43) hours. There were no statistically significant difference between groups in any of the sleep parameters investigated. Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found that the educational intervention did not achieve longer nighttime sleep duration among infants in the intervention group. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02788630.