@misc{Narayan_Amitesh_Comparison_2025,
 author={Narayan, Amitesh and Sai Anand, Polisetti Siva and Karnad, Shreekanth D. and Alammari, Abdulaziz},
 year={2025},
 rights={Wszystkie prawa zastrzeżone (Copyright)},
 publisher={Wydawnictwo Akademii Wychowania Fizycznego im. Polskich Olimpijczyków we Wrocławiu},
 language={ang},
 abstract={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 investiga-tor 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 dem-onstrated 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.},
 type={artykuł},
 title={Comparison of the predictive validity of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale and Infant Neurological International Battery in low-birth-weight infants: a prospective longitudinal study},
 keywords={Infant Neurological International Battery, Alberta Infant Motor Scale, motor outcomes, low birth weight infants, predictive validity, Peabody Developmental Motor Scale-2},
}