Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of a clinic-based literacy intervention on the language development of preschool children. METHODS: A convenience sample of families presenting to 2 urban pediatric clinics for well-child care met the following criteria: the family was Latino or black and English- or Spanish-speaking; the child was 2 to 5.9 years old, with no neurodevelopmental disability, at a gestational age of 34 weeks or more, and not attending kindergarten. Participants at the first clinic (intervention group) were exposed to a literacy support program, based on Reach Out and Read (ROR), during the previous 3 years. At the second clinic (comparison group), a similar program started 3 months before the study. Parent-child reading activities were measured using the READ Subscale of the StimQ. Language development was measured using the One-Word Expressive and Receptive Picture Vocabulary Tests, and was performed in the child's primary language. RESULTS: A total of 122 study participants (49 interventions and 73 comparisons) met inclusion criteria and completed all measures. Intervention and comparison families were similar for most sociodemographic variables. Intervention families reported reading together with their children approximately 1 more day per week. Intensity of exposure to ROR (measured by total number of contacts with the program) was associated with increased parent-child reading activities, as measured by the StimQ-Read Subscale (r = 0.20). Intervention children had higher receptive language (mean: 94.5 vs 84.8) and expressive language (mean: 84.3 vs 81.6). After adjusting for potential confounders in a multiple regression analysis, intervention status was associated with an 8.6-point increase (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.3, 14.0) in receptive language (semipartial correlation [SR]coefficient = 0.27), and a 4.3-point increase (95% CI: 0.04, 8.6) in expressive language (SR = 0.17). In a similar multiple regression, each contact with ROR was associated with an adjusted mean 0.4-point increase (95% CI: 0.1, 0.6) in receptive score, and an adjusted mean 0.21-point increase (95% CI: 0. 02, 0.4) in expressive score. CONCLUSIONS: ROR is an important intervention, promoting parental literacy support and enhancing language development in impoverished preschool children. Integration of literacy promoting interventions such as these into routine pediatric health care for underserved populations can be recommended

The authors studied toddlers with low-level lead exposure to determine whether adverse developmental effects were evident. The study sample consisted of a cohort of 68 children aged 12 to 36 months who had blood lead levels lower than 25 microg/dL on a routine screening in a large urban public hospital clinic. Children with blood lead levels between 10 and 24.9 microg/dL had a mean Mental Developmental Index (Bayley Scales of Infant Development, Second Edition) score that was 6.3 points lower than that of children with blood lead levels between 0 and 9.9 microg/dL (95% confidence interval: 0.6, 11.9). After adjusting for confounders, the difference was 6.2 points (95% confidence interval: 1.7, 10.8). Pediatricians and public health entities should continue in their efforts to reduce the lead burden through environmental control and ongoing surveillance

OBJECTIVES: The overall goal of this study was to prospectively assess risk factors for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) in infants of birth weight <1250 g in an urban population at Bellevue Hospital Center, New York, New York. The hypothesis tested was that lack of prenatal care increases the incidence of ROP. METHODS: A consecutive sample of patients admitted to Bellevue Hospital Center's neonatal intensive care unit/special care nursery who weighed <1250 g at birth and survived until their ophthalmology screening examinations were included in the study. The main outcome measures were presence or absence of ROP and prenatal care. Additional relevant clinical information was collected on the patients. RESULTS: Ninety infants were evaluated. Sixty-one (68%) had ROP; 29 (32%) had no ROP. No differences in incidence or severity of ROP were detected with regard to prenatal care when the 2 groups were compared. In this population <1250 g, there were no differences in birth weight or gestational age with respect to prenatal care or lack of prenatal care. CONCLUSIONS: Lack of prenatal care was not associated with an increased risk for ROP in infants with birth weight <1250 g in this urban population