Reliability of the Motor Optimality Score-Revised: A study of infants at elevated likelihood for adverse neurological outcomes

12Citations
Citations of this article
31Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Aim: To assess the inter-assessor reliability of the Motor Optimality Score-Revised (MOS-R) when used in infants at elevated likelihood for adverse neurological outcome. Methods: MOS-R were assessed in three groups of infants by two assessors/cohort. Infants were recruited from longitudinal projects in Sweden (infants born extremely preterm), India (infants born in low-resource communities) and the USA (infants prenatally exposed to SARS-CoV-2). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and kappa (κw) were applied. ICC of MOS-R subcategories and total scores were presented for cohorts together and separately and for age-spans: 9–12, 13–16 and 17–25-weeks post-term age. Results: 252 infants were included (born extremely preterm n = 97, born in low-resource communities n = 97, prenatally SARS-CoV-2 exposed n = 58). Reliability of the total MOS-R was almost perfect (ICC: 0.98–0.99) for all cohorts, together and separately. Similar result was found for age-spans (ICC: 0.98–0.99). Substantial to perfect reliability was shown for the MOS-R subcategories (κw: 0.67–1.00), with postural patterns showing the lowest value 0.67. Conclusion: The MOS-R can be used in high-risk populations with substantial to perfect reliability, both in regards of total/subcategory scores as well as in different age groups. However, the subcategory postural patterns as well as the clinical applicability of the MOS-R needs further study.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Örtqvist, M., Marschik, P. B., Toldo, M., Zhang, D., Fajardo-Martinez, V., Nielsen-Saines, K., … Einspieler, C. (2023). Reliability of the Motor Optimality Score-Revised: A study of infants at elevated likelihood for adverse neurological outcomes. Acta Paediatrica, International Journal of Paediatrics, 112(6), 1259–1265. https://doi.org/10.1111/apa.16747

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free