Early life risk factors of motor, cognitive and language development: a pooled analysis of studies from low/middle-income countries.

OBJECTIVE:To determine the magnitude of relationships of early life factors with child development in low/middle-income countries (LMICs). DESIGN:Meta-analyses of standardised mean differences (SMDs) estimated from published and unpublished data. DATA SOURCES:We searched Medline, bibliographies of key articles and reviews, and grey literature to identify studies from LMICs that collected data on early life exposures and child development. The most recent search was done on 4 November 2014. We then invited the first authors of the publications and investigators of unpublished studies to participate in the study. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES:Studies that assessed at least one domain of child development in at least 100 children under 7 years of age and collected at least one early life factor of interest were included in the study. ANALYSES:Linear regression models were used to assess SMDs in child development by parental and child factors within each study. We then produced pooled estimates across studies using random effects meta-analyses. RESULTS:We retrieved data from 21 studies including 20 882 children across 13 LMICs, to assess the associations of exposure to 14 major risk factors with child development. Children of mothers with secondary schooling had 0.14 SD (95% CI 0.05 to 0.25) higher cognitive scores compared with children whose mothers had primary education. Preterm birth was associated with 0.14 SD (-0.24 to -0.05) and 0.23 SD (-0.42 to -0.03) reductions in cognitive and motor scores, respectively. Maternal short stature, anaemia in infancy and lack of access to clean water and sanitation had significant negative associations with cognitive and motor development with effects ranging from -0.18 to -0.10 SDs. CONCLUSIONS:Differential parental, environmental and nutritional factors contribute to disparities in child development across LMICs. Targeting these factors from prepregnancy through childhood may improve health and development of children

Delivering the Thinking Healthy Programme as a universal group intervention integrated into routine antenatal care: a randomized-controlled pilot study

BackgroundWomen with perinatal depression and their children are at increased risk of poor health outcomes. There is a need to implement non-stigmatizing interventions into existing health systems which reduce psychosocial distress during pregnancy and prevent perinatal depression. We adapted the WHO-endorsed Thinking Healthy Programme (THP) to be delivered universally to all women attending routine online pregnancy schools in Istanbul, Turkey. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of this intervention.MethodsThis mixed-methods study incorporated a two-arm pilot randomized controlled trial and qualitative evaluation of the feasibility and acceptability of the adapted THP - Brief Group version (THP-BGV) to a range of stakeholders. We recruited pregnant women at 12-30 weeks' gestation through pregnancy schools within the University Hospital's catchment area. Women in the intervention arm received five online sessions of the THP-BGV delivered by antenatal nurses. The intervention employed principles of cognitive behaviour therapy to provide psychoeducation, behaviour activation, problem-solving strategies and group support to participants. In the control arm, women received usual care consisting of routine online educational pregnancy classes aided by the antenatal nurses. The women were assessed for depressive symptoms with the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale at baseline and 4-6 weeks post-intervention and also evaluated for anxiety, perceived social support, partner relationship, level of disability and sleep quality. In-depth interviews were conducted with women and other key stakeholders.ResultsOf the 99 consecutive women referred to the pregnancy schools, 91 (91.9%) were eligible and 88 (88.8%) consented to participate in the study and were randomized. Eighty-two (83%) completed the final assessments. Our main findings were that this preventive group intervention was feasible to be integrated into routine antenatal educational classes and it was valued by the women and delivery-agents. While the study was not powered to detect differences between intervention and control conditions, we found small trends towards reduction in anxiety and depressive symptoms favoring the intervention arm. No serious adverse events were reported.ConclusionsGiven the paucity of preventive interventions for perinatal depression in low and middle-income countries, a fully powered definitive randomized controlled trial of this feasible and acceptable intervention should be conducted.Trial registrationThe study was registered at Clinical Trails.gov ( NCT04819711 ) (Registration Date: 29/03/2021)