Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 8, 2026
Assessment and Evaluation of the High Risk Neonate: The NICU Network Neurobehavioral Scale
Published on: August 25, 2014
Educational outcome at 8 years for children who were born extremely prematurely: a controlled study
J R Bowen1, F L Gibson, P J Hand
1Department of Neonatology, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards and Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. jbowen@med.usyd.edu.au
Insights
Extremely premature children often need extra school support. Even without disabilities, they show lower academic achievement and require more special education resources than full-term peers.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Medicine
- Developmental Psychology
- Educational Psychology
Background:
- Extremely premature birth (<28 weeks gestation or <1000g) poses long-term developmental challenges.
- Understanding educational outcomes is crucial for early intervention and support.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the educational outcomes at age 8 in extremely premature children.
- To assess the utilization of special education resources in this cohort.
- To compare these outcomes with a matched full-term born cohort.
Main Methods:
- Longitudinal study of extremely premature children born between 1985-1990.
- Matched cohort of full-term children enrolled at age 8.
- Assessment using standardized cognitive and academic achievement measures.
- Teacher-reported data on educational support and progress.
Main Results:
- Non-disabled extremely premature children scored lower academically than controls.
- 48% of extremely premature children fell below grade level in reading, math, and spelling.
- 25% required special education support, significantly more than controls (4%).
Conclusions:
- Extremely premature children, even those without overt disabilities, often require additional educational support.
- Early identification and intervention are vital for academic success.
- Parents and educators must be vigilant for learning difficulties in this population.
Objective:
To assess the educational outcome and utilization of special education resources at age 8 years in children who were born extremely prematurely, and to compare this outcome with a matched cohort of children born full-term.
Methods:
All children with gestational age less than 28 weeks or birthweight of less than 1000 g, born at Royal North Shore Hospital from July 1985 through June 1990 were enrolled in a study of long-term outcome. A cohort of full-term children matched for age, sex and school with non-disabled extremely premature children was enrolled at age 8 years. Children were assessed using standardized measures of cognitive and academic achievement. Information was obtained from teachers regarding educational support and academic progress.
Results:
Of 82 extremely premature children assessed at age 8 years, 8 (10%) had a severe disability, 13 (16%) had a mild or moderate disability and 61 (74%) were non-disabled (IQ > or = 85, no neurosensory disability). Thirty-five (43%) required special education support, 22 (27%) were below grade level in reading or mathematics and 25 (30%) were performing at grade level without support. Compared with controls, non-disabled extremely premature children had lower scores on standardized measures of academic achievement and were more likely to be reported by teachers as falling below grade level in reading (48% vs 13%; P < 0.001), mathematics (48% vs 10%; P < 0.001) and spelling (48% vs 17%; P < 0.002), and to require special education support (25% vs 4%; P = 0.004).
Conclusion:
Parents and professionals caring for extremely premature children need to be alert to the additional support that these children may require at school.
