Not exact matches
NEW YORK (Reuters Health)- Children who were breastfed for more than six months
scored the highest
on cognitive, language and motor
development tests as toddlers, in a new study from Greece.
They found that the babies of nursing moms who had consumed at least one alcoholic drink each day did not differ in measures of
cognitive development from babies of teetotaling moms, but that they did
score lower
on tests of motor skills.
Several studies have also attempted to understand the role of breastfeeding
on IQ, and although some authors conclude that the observed advantage of breastfeeding
on IQ is related only to genetic and socioenvironmental factors, a recent meta - analysis showed that after adjustment for appropriate key co-factors, breastfeeding was associated with significantly higher
scores for
cognitive development than formula feeding.6 Longer duration of breastfeeding has also been positively associated with intelligence in adulthood.22 We also observed the benefits of long - term breastfeeding
on mental indices, along with the indirect benefit of balancing the impact of exposure to p, p ′ DDE after adjustment for some socioeconomic variables.
Findings from the National Early Head Start Research and Evaluation project, a rigorous Congressionally - mandated study, indicate that the program had modest but positive impacts
on EHS children at age three in
cognitive, language, and social - emotional
development, compared to a control group.xxiii In addition, their parents
scored higher than control group parents
on such aspects of the home environment as parenting behavior and knowledge of infant - toddler
development.
The health risks associated with formula feeding for premature infants include increased incidence of necrotizing enterocolitis, 5 delayed brainstem maturation, 6 decreased
scoring on cognitive and developmental tests,7 - 10 and decreased visual
development.11, 12 Thus, human - milk feeding of premature infants is desirable, and effective strategies to increase breastfeeding rates in this population are needed.
Others, however, question whether a greater reliance
on video games is in students» best interests, indicating there is little proof that skillful game play translates into better test
scores or broader
cognitive development.
Compiled data from all 3,001 children and their families showed that Early Head Start children
scored higher,
on average, than their peers
on standardized tests of
cognitive and language
development; and far fewer children tested as requiring remediation.
She provides leadership in designing effective comprehensive assessment systems, including guidance
on the
development of performance assessments and rubrics, facilitating deep understanding of
cognitive rigor,
scoring and analyzing student work, and deepening understanding of assessment and data literacy.
The AEDC data are collected by teachers who complete an online checklist for each child in their first year of formal full - time school (∼ 5 years old) covering the five ECD areas previously noted of physical
development, social competence, emotional maturity, language, and
cognitive development (eg, academic learning), and general knowledge and communication.17 Children are
scored on each of these domains, and categorised as «developmentally vulnerable» (≤ 10th centile), «developmentally at risk» (between 10th and 25th centiles) and «developmentally
on track» (≥ 25th centile) 17 Children who are developmentally at risk
on one or more ECD domain (ie, DV1) is typically reported in AEDC publications.
In Denver, low - resource families who received home visiting showed modest benefits in children's language and
cognitive development.102 In Elmira, only the intervention children whose mothers smoked cigarettes before the experiment experienced
cognitive benefits.103 In Memphis, children of mothers with low psychological resources104 in the intervention group had higher grades and achievement test
scores at age nine than their counterparts in the control group.105 Early Head Start also identified small, positive effects
on children's
cognitive abilities, though the change was for the program as a whole and not specific to home - visited families.106 Similarly, IHDP identified large
cognitive effects at twenty - four and thirty - six months, but not at twelve months, so the effects can not be attributed solely to home - visiting services.107
In the area of
cognitive and academic functioning, NSCAW documented that the majority of foster children
scored in the normal range
on cognitive and academic measures, although a higher proportion than would be expected in the general population were found to have delayed
cognitive development and compromised academic functioning.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Father involvement has a unique impact
on children's outcomes, including
cognitive development, achievement, math and reading
scores, as well as behavior.
By school entry, 43 — 47 % of Aboriginal children have markers of developmental vulnerability.12, 13 In 2009, the first - ever national census of childhood
development at school entry showed that Aboriginal children were 2 — 3 times more likely than non-Aboriginal children to be developmentally vulnerable — defined as an Australian Early Development Census (AEDC) score below the 10th centile — on one or more domains.14 The Longitudinal Survey of Australian Children reported similar disparities for cognitive outcomes among Aboriginal children aged 4 — 5 years, although the number of Aboriginal children was very small and not representative of the Aboriginal population.15 There is currently a dearth of empirical research that identifies the drivers of positive early childhood health and development in Aboriginal children, or characterises vulnerable developmental tr
development at school entry showed that Aboriginal children were 2 — 3 times more likely than non-Aboriginal children to be developmentally vulnerable — defined as an Australian Early
Development Census (AEDC) score below the 10th centile — on one or more domains.14 The Longitudinal Survey of Australian Children reported similar disparities for cognitive outcomes among Aboriginal children aged 4 — 5 years, although the number of Aboriginal children was very small and not representative of the Aboriginal population.15 There is currently a dearth of empirical research that identifies the drivers of positive early childhood health and development in Aboriginal children, or characterises vulnerable developmental tr
Development Census (AEDC)
score below the 10th centile —
on one or more domains.14 The Longitudinal Survey of Australian Children reported similar disparities for
cognitive outcomes among Aboriginal children aged 4 — 5 years, although the number of Aboriginal children was very small and not representative of the Aboriginal population.15 There is currently a dearth of empirical research that identifies the drivers of positive early childhood health and
development in Aboriginal children, or characterises vulnerable developmental tr
development in Aboriginal children, or characterises vulnerable developmental trajectories.