Skip to main content
NCBI home page
JCPP Advances logoLink to JCPP Advances
. 2021 Jun 26;1(2):e12018. doi: 10.1111/jcv2.12018

Changes in emotional problems, hyperactivity and conduct problems in moderate to late preterm children and adolescents born between 1958 and 2002 in the United Kingdom

Ayten Bilgin 1,2,✉, Dieter Wolke 2,3, Nicole Baumann 2, Hayley Trower 2, Asteria Brylka 2, Katri Räikkönen 4, Kati Heinonen 4,5, Eero Kajantie 6,7,8,9, Daniel Schnitzlein 10,11,12, Sakari Lemola 2,13
PMCID: PMC10242980  PMID: 37431476

Abstract

Background

Preterm birth is a risk factor for the development of emotional and behavioural problems in childhood and adolescence. Given the substantial improvements in neonatal care across decades, it has been expected that the difference in emotional problems, hyperactivity, and conduct problems between moderate to late preterm (MLPT) and full term (FT) children and adolescents have declined in recent years.

Methods

Data from four UK population‐based studies were used: The National Child Development Study (NCDS; 1958), the British Cohort Study (BCS70; 1970), the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC, 1991–1992) and the Millennium Cohort Study (MCS; 2000–2002). Emotional problems, hyperactivity and conduct problems were assessed with mother‐reports in early childhood (5–7 years), late childhood (10–11 years) and adolescence (14–16 years). Furthermore, emotional problems were self‐reported in adolescence in BCS70, ALSPAC and MCS.

Results

In the most recent cohort, the MLPT group had higher mother‐reported emotional problems than those born FT in late childhood and adolescence, whereas there were no differences in self‐reported emotional problems in adolescence. Regarding mother‐reported hyperactivity symptoms, the MLPT group had higher scores than the FT group in the two most recent cohorts in late childhood and in the most recent cohort in adolescence. Regarding mother‐reported conduct problems, MLPT children had significantly higher scores than the FT children in the oldest and in the most recent cohort in late childhood. On the other hand, in adolescence, MLPT children had significantly lower scores in conduct problems in comparison to FT children in the cohort born in 1991–1992.

Conclusions

Mother‐reported emotional problems and hyperactivity symptoms of those born MLPT have increased from the birth years 1958 to 2000–2002 during late childhood and adolescence, whereas self‐reported emotional problems were similar in MLPT and FT groups during adolescence from 1970 to 2000–2002. Findings are less consistent regarding conduct problems. The current findings highlight the importance of raising the awareness of teachers about the association between MLPT birth and behavioural and emotional problems in late childhood and adolescence to prevent the long‐term negative outcomes associated with the sequalae of MLPT birth.

Keywords: MCS, NCDS, preterm

graphic file with name JCV2-1-e12018-g001.jpg

INTRODUCTION

Preterm birth is a risk factor for the development of emotional and behavioural problems in childhood and adolescence (Aarnoudse‐Moens et al., 2009; Bhutta et al., 2002). Preterm birth rates (<37 weeks of gestation) have increased significantly with one in ten babies being born preterm (Chawanpaiboon et al., 2019). Among preterm children, those born moderate‐to‐late preterm (MLPT; born between 32nd and 36th completed weeks of gestation) constitute the largest subgroup, accounting for 84.7% of preterm births worldwide (Chawanpaiboon et al., 2019) and 85.3% of preterm births in the UK (Euro‐Peristat Project, 2018). However, our knowledge regarding the behavioural and emotional development of MLPT born children has been limited in two ways.

Key points.

  • It is unknown if the difference between moderate to late preterm and full term children has changed from 1958 to 2000–2002 with regards to emotional problems, hyperactivity, and conduct problems given the advancements in neonatal care during this period.

  • Mother‐reported emotional problems and hyperactivity became more common in moderate to late preterm children and adolescents in the 2000s, whereas findings are less consistent regarding the change of conduct problems.

  • Teachers should be informed about the association between moderate to late preterm birth and behavioural and emotional problems in late childhood and adolescence to prevent the long‐term negative outcomes associated with moderate to late preterm birth.

First, most studies on the behavioural and emotional outcomes of preterm children have focused on those born very (VPT) or extremely preterm (EPT) rather than MLPT born children. Higher rates of behavioural and emotional problems in the VPT or EPT group have been consistently reported in childhood (Adams‐Chapman, 2006; Johnson & Wolke, 2013; Shapiro‐Mendoza & Lackritz, 2012). To illustrate, it was shown that hyperactivity problems were more pronounced in EPT born children with ratings being 0.46 SD higher than FT children (Mathewson et al., 2017) and very recently, it was shown that children born VPT were at 5.6‐fold elevated risk of meeting the criteria for any mental health disorders at 13 years of age (Yates et al., 2020).

Traditionally, it was thought that MLPT born children are only little affected in their development. However, there is increasing evidence that MLPT born children show suboptimal neurodevelopmental outcomes during the early years (Johnson, Evans, et al., 2015; Morse et al., 2009; Woythaler et al., 2011). This could be due to the fact that MLPT birth coincides with rapid brain development, it puts infants at an increased risk for brain injury, and it is related to a smaller and less mature brain size (Walsh et al., 2014). Thus, it is important to understand if emotional, hyperactivity and conduct problems are also more common in MLPT born children given that they represent the majority of the preterm births.

Existing studies on emotional problems in MLPT born children focused on the age range from preschool to 8 years (de Jong et al., 2012; McGowan et al., 2011; Potijk et al., 2012; Rogers et al., 2013; Talge et al., 2010; van Baar et al., 2009; Westrupp et al., 2012), and the studies on hyperactivity focused on early childhood (Huddy et al., 2001; Talge et al., 2010; van Baar et al., 2009). Moreover, there is less focus on conduct problems, where one study reported higher externalising problems at 4 years of age (Potijk et al., 2012), while another one reported lower levels of aggression from 4 to 15 years of age compared to the FT group (Gurka et al., 2010). Some of these studies revealed that MLPT born children have higher scores in both internalising and externalising problems than FT born children, whereas others showed that MLPT children have higher scores only in attention problems and internalising problems, along with some other studies which showed no significant differences between the MLPT and FT groups (Fitzallen et al., 2021; Gurka et al., 2010; Potijk et al., 2012; Talge et al., 2010; van Baar et al., 2009). Thus, there is a lack of studies that has investigated emotional problems, hyperactivity and conduct problems following MLPT birth during late childhood and adolescence with existing studies revealing conflicting results.

Second, no studies have investigated whether differences between MLPT and FT children in emotional problems, hyperactivity and conduct problems have changed across recent decades during which major changes in prenatal and neonatal care practices have taken place. It may be expected that any differences between MLPT and FT children may have decreased over time due to advances in obstetric and neonatological care (Dunn, 2007), such as improved nutrition, treatment of infections and, in particular for the moderately preterm infants in high‐income countries, the introduction of assisted ventilation in the late 1960s, antenatal glucocorticoids in the 1970s and postnatal surfactant therapy in the 1980s (March of Dimes, 2012; Philip, 2012). In addition to the technical developments in neonatal care, the introduction of family‐centred care have been shown to be beneficial for infant morbidity and psychological development (Boundy et al., 2016).

In the current study, we examine whether the difference in emotional problems, hyperactivity and conduct problems between MLPT and FT born individuals has changed over a 40‐year period in the UK at three distinct time points in development: early childhood, late childhood and adolescence. We used mother ratings for all outcomes. In addition, we used self‐reports of emotional problems in adolescence where such data was available since self and mother reports on emotional problems may differ from each other (Eg et al., 2018). Several factors which may play a role in the development of emotional and behaviour problems such as sex, multiple birth, parity, low parental education, minority ethnicity status, neurosensory impairments, foetal growth restriction, maternal age and maternal smoking during pregnancy were considered as covariates (Grey et al., 2004).

METHODS

Participants

National Child Development Study

The National Child Development Study (NCDS) is a cohort of 17,415 children born in one week (3rd–9th March) in 1958 in England, Wales and Scotland (Fogelman, 1983; Power & Elliott, 2006). It includes assessments at birth, 7, 11, and 16 years and later time points. More information regarding the sample is available on the website: http://www.cls.ioe.ac.uk/. In the current study, the assessments at 7 (N MLPT  = 497; N FT  = 10,586), 11 (N MLPT  = 448; N FT  = 9348) and 16 (N MLPT  = 354; N FT  = 7737) years were utilised.

British Cohort Study 1970

The British Cohort Study 1970 (BCS70) comprises 17,198 births in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland between 5th and 11th April 1970 (Elliott & Shepherd, 2006), with the first sweep occurring at birth followed by a further nine sweeps to date until adulthood. In the current study, assessments at 5 (N MLPT  = 428; N FT  = 8680), 10 (N MLPT  = 419; N FT  = 8681) and 16 years (N MLPT  = 282; N FT  = 5677) were utilised.

The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children

The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) is a UK birth cohort examining the determinants of development, health and disease. The study is described in detail elsewhere (Boyd et al., 2013; Fraser et al., 2013). ALSPAC recruited 14,541 pregnant women with expected delivery dates of 1st April 1991–31st December 1992. Of the initial pregnancies, there were 14,676 foetuses resulting in 14,062 live births; 13,988 children were alive at 1 year of age. Ethical approval was obtained from the ALSPAC Law and Ethics committee and the local research ethics committee. Informed consent for the use of data collected via questionnaires and clinics was obtained from participants following the recommendations of the ALSPAC Ethics and Law Committee at the time. From the first trimester of pregnancy, parents completed postal questionnaires about themselves and the study child. The study website contains details of all data available through a fully searchable dictionary (http://www.bris.ac.uk/alspac/researchers/data‐access/data‐dictionary/). In the current study, assessments at 6 (N MLPT  = 378; N FT  = 7631), 11 (N MLPT  = 303; N FT  = 6124) and 16 years (N MLPT  = 240; N FT  = 4725) were utilised.

Millennium Cohort Study

Millennium Cohort Study (MCS) is a national birth cohort of 18,818 children born between 1st September 2000 and 11th January 2002 in England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland (Connelly & Platt, 2014). More information is available at http://www.cls.ioe.ac.uk/. Ethical approval and written informed consent were obtained (London–Hampstead Research Ethics Committee, REC reference 14/LO/0868). In the current study, assessments at 7 (N MLPT  = 888; N FT  = 11,488), 11 (N MLPT  = 847; N FT  = 10,922) and 14 years (N MLPT  = 733; N FT  = 9641) were utilised.

Assessments across cohorts were grouped into three points: early childhood (5–7 years), late childhood (10–11 years) and adolescence (14–16 years). Characteristics of the participants included in the study are shown in Table 1 (See Table S1 for characteristics of the participants who dropped‐out). The ethical approval for the current study was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the University of Warwick (96/17‐18).

TABLE 1.

Characteristics of participants in four cohorts

NCDS BCS70 ALSPAC MCS
Early childhood
N = 11083 N = 9108 N = 7739 N = 12376
MLPT: N (%) 497 (4.5%) 428 (4.7%) 378 (4.9%) 888 (7.2%)
Female: N (%) 5347 (48.2%) 4388 (48.2%) 3789 (48.9%) 6126 (49.5%)
First born: N (%) 3992 (36%) 3337 (36.6%) 3628 (46.9%) 5181 (41.9%)
Multiple birth: N (%) 285 (2.6%) 190 (2.09%) 170 (2.19%) 310 (2.5%)
Neurosensory impairment: N (%) 91 (0.8%) 28 (0.3%) 41 (0.5%) 275 (%)
Ethnic minority group: N (%) 161 (1.5%) 197 (2.2%) 285 (3.7%) 1736 (14%)
Parental education below tertiary: N (%) 7007 (63.2%) 4690 (51.5%) 2575 (33.3%) 2745 (22.2%)
Maternal age: M (SD) 27.54 (5.88) 26.39 (5.5) 28.79 (4.42) 28.96 (6.01)
Smoking during pregnancy: N (%) 4420 (39.9%) 4661 (51.2%) 1261 (16.3%) 2671 (21.6%)
Late childhood
N = 9796 N = 9100 N = 6427 N = 11769
MLPT: N (%) 448 (4.6%) 419 (4.6%) 303 (4.7%) 847 (7.2%)
Female: N (%) 4729 (48.3%) 4430 (48.7%) 3235 (50.3%) 5867 (49.9%)
First born: N (%) 3507 (35.8%) 3349 (36.8%) 3039 (47.3%) 4925 (41.8%)
Multiple birth: N (%) 247 (2.5%) 196 (2.2%) 126 (1.9%) 296 (2.5%)
Neurosensory impairment: N (%) 77 (0.8%) 24 (0.3%) 36 (0.6%) 269 (2.3%)
Ethnic minority group: N (%) 153 (1.6%) 264 (2.9%) 212 (3.3%) 1739 (14.8%)
Parental education below tertiary: N (%) 6163 (62.9%) 4671 (51.3%) 2057 (32%) 2650 (22.5%)
Maternal age: M (SD) 27.53 (5.86) 26.28 (5.55) 28.98 (4.36) 28.94 (5.96)
Smoking during pregnancy: N (%) 3901 (39.8%) 4679 (51.4%) 936 (14.6%) 2498 (21.2%)
Adolescence
N = 8091 N = 5959 N = 4965 N = 10374
MLPT: N (%) 354 (4.4%) 282 (4.7%) 240 (4.8%) 733 (7.1%)
Female: N (%) 3931 (48.6%) 3036 (50.9%) 2588 (52.1%) 5179 (49.9%)
First born: N (%) 2960 (36.6%) 2310 (38.8%) 2435 (49%) 4357 (41.9%)
Multiple birth: N (%) 211 (2.61%) 120 (2.01%) 95 (1.91%) 245 (2.36%)
Neurosensory impairment: N (%) 57 (0.70%) 16 (0.27%) 34 (0.68%) 278 (2.68%)
Ethnic minority group: N (%) 111 (1.37%) 133 (2.23%) 168 (3.38%) 1703 (16.4%)
Parental education below tertiary: N (%) 5111 (63.2%) 2871 (48.2%) 1462 (29.5%) 2205 (21.3%)
Maternal age: M (SD) 27.35 (5.83) 26.27 (5.59) 29.14 (4.41) 29.05 (5.95)
Smoking during pregnancy: N (%) 3224 (39.8%) 2948 (49.5%) 646 (13%) 2084 (20.1%)
Open in a new tab

Abbreviations: ALSPAC, Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children; BCS70, British Child Development Study; MCS, Millennium Cohort Study; MLPT, Moderate to Late Preterm; NCDS, National Child Development Study.

Measures

Moderate to late preterm birth

Gestational full weeks were recoded into a categorical variable as follows: 0, full‐term (FT: 37th–41st completed weeks of gestation); and 1, moderate to late preterm (MLPT; 32nd–36th completed weeks of gestation).

Emotional problems, hyperactivity and conduct problems

At all measurement points, we used mother ratings of emotional problems, hyperactivity and conduct problems using the Rutter behaviour questions (Rutter et al., 1970) in NCDS (at 7, 11, 16 years) and BCS70 (at 5, 10, 16 years) and the Strengths & Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) (Goodman, 1997) in ALSPAC (at 6, 11, 16 years) and MCS (at 7, 11, 14 years). Although SDQ was developed based on the Rutter scale and the two scales are highly correlated (Stone et al., 2010), we wanted to make sure the scores are comparable across the scales. Thus, we only used the items which are very similar across the scales following the guidance from Centre for Longitudinal Studies regarding the harmonisation of mental health measures across UK cohorts (Table S2). The harmonised answering scale ranged for all measures from one (not true) to three (certainly true).

With respect to emotional problems, we further used self‐reports in adolescence in the cohorts where such data was available (BCS70, ALSPAC and MCS). Adolescents completed the 15‐item psychological subscale of Malaise Inventory (Rutter et al., 1970) in BCS70, which measures the level of depression with a 3‐point response scale (0 = rarely or never, 1 = some of the time, 2 = most of the time) and has good reliability and validity (Rodgers et al., 1999). In ALSPAC and MCS, adolescents completed the short version of the Moods and Feelings Questionnaire (SMFQ) (Angold et al., 1995; Costello & Angold, 1988), which is a 13‐item measure with good reliability and validity (Rhew et al., 2010; Turner et al., 2014). Self‐reported emotional problems scales had high reliability in the current samples (BCS70: α = .82; ALSPAC: α = .91; MCS: α = .93).

Covariates

The following variables were included as covariates: sex (0 = male; 1 = female), ethnic group (0 = majority; 1 = minority), birth status (0 = singleton; 1 = multiple birth), parity (0 = first born child; 1 = second born or later), neurosensory impairment (0 = no; 1 = yes), obligatory education only or lower of either parent at participants’ birth (0 = A level/vocational equivalent or higher education/university degree; 1 = obligatory education only or lower), foetal growth restriction, maternal age at birth, and smoking during pregnancy (0 = no; 1 = yes). Neurosensory impairments were either extracted from medical records or parent‐reported and indicated by the presence of either (a) an IQ score for fluid reasoning of 3SDs below the mean identified between 5 and 11 years, (b) parent‐ or school‐reported visual or hearing impairment, or (c) severe congenital malformations identified during the child’s first year of life. As a measure of foetal growth, birth weight z‐scores were computed via the model proposed by Hadlock (Hadlock et al., 1991).

Statistical analysis

Statistical analyses were performed with Stata version 15. Differences between MLPT and FT‐born individuals in emotional problems, hyperactivity and conduct problems within cohort in early and late childhood and adolescence were tested using multivariate linear regressions with the survey command (svy), which includes the sample‐specific weights to account for the survey design of MCS, which over‐sampled areas of higher proportions of ethnic minorities and child poverty. Standard analytic procedures and sampling weights, developed for use with MCS (Plewis, 2007), accounted for this, and ensured results were nationally representative. All utilised outcome variables were standardised according to the scores of FT children (z‐scores). All analyses were adjusted for sex, ethnic group, multiple birth, parity, neurosensory impairment, parental education at birth, foetal growth restriction, maternal age, and smoking during pregnancy (Table S3).

Power analysis

Based on the sample sizes, observed statistical power to detect a small difference between MLPT and FT of d = .20 was calculated with Gpower (version 3.1.9.4) (Faul et al., 2007), which revealed statistical power greater than .85 for all of the analyses (Table S4).

Sensitivity analyses

Three sensitivity analyses were conducted to test whether the findings were robust to changes in the analytic plan: (1) Separate analyses for those born late preterm (LPT; 34‐36 weeks of gestation) to understand if the findings would differ; (2) Multiple imputations (20 imputations) were carried out using chained equations separately in the four cohorts and all main analyses were repeated using the imputed data to understand whether sample attrition has changed the results and (3) Analyses with the full Rutter and SDQ sub‐scales (i.e., not only selecting items which were the same across cohorts) to understand whether harmonisation changed the results.

RESULTS

Emotional problems in MLPT born children and adolescents

In early childhood, there were no significant differences between MLPT and FT born children in all cohorts (Figure 1, Table 2). In late childhood and in adolescence, the MLPT group had significantly higher scores on mother‐rated emotional problems in comparison to the FT group in the most recent cohort (β = .147, 95% CI: .023; .271; and β = .158, 95% CI: .048; .267, respectively) but not in the earlier cohorts. However, there were no significant differences between the MLPT and FT groups in self‐reported emotional problems from 1970 to 2000–2002.

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1

Open in a new tab

Standardised beta coefficients showing change in mother‐rated emotional problems, hyperactivity and conduct problems by gestational age (moderate to late preterm [MLPT] and full‐term [FT]). 1958: National Child Development Study (NCDS); 1970: British Child Development Study (BCS70); 1991‐1992: Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC); 2000‐2002: Millennium Cohort Study (MCS)

TABLE 2.

Standardised difference estimates between MLPT and FT born individuals in emotional problems, hyperactivity and conduct problems

NCDS BCS70 ALSPAC MCS
β (SE), 95% CI β (SE), 95% CI β (SE), 95% CI β (SE), 95% CI
Early childhood (5–7 years)
Emotional problems −.003 (.047), −.092 (.050), −.032 (.057), .061 (.045),
(−.096; .089) (−.191; .006) (−.144; .079) (−.028; .150)
Hyperactivity .070 (.047), .001 (.050), .053 (.057), .062 (.041),
(−.021; .163) (−.097; .100) (−.058; .166) (−.019; .143)
Conduct problems .038 (.046), −.062 (.049), .069 (.057), .014 (.042),
(−.052; .129) −.160; .034) (−.042; .181) (−.069; .098)
Late childhood (10–11 years)
Emotional problems −.067 (.050), −.015 (.051), .017 (.064), .147 (.063),
(−.165; .030) (−.116; .085) (−.109; .143) (.023; .271)
Hyperactivity .079 (.050), .086 (.050), .208 (.064), .158 (.052),
(−.019; .178) (−.010; .188) (.081; .334) (.054; .261)
Conduct problems .119 (.049), .004 (.050), −.006 (.063), .136 (.060),
(.023; .215) (−.094; .103) (−.131; .118) (.016; .255)
Adolescence (14–16 years)
Emotional problems .096 (.056), .053 (.062), .003 (.071), .158 (.055),
(−.014; .207) (−.069; .176) (−.136; .144) (.048; .267)
Self‐reported emotional problems ‐ −.039 (.081), −.051 (.074), .060 (.050),
(−.199; .120) (−.196; .093) (−.038; .160)
Hyperactivity .049 (.056), .033 (.063), −.005 (.072), .199 (.064),
(−.060; .160) (−.090; .157) (−.146; .136) (.073; .325)
Conduct problems .033 (.055), .034 (.062), −.143 (.071), .093 (.057),
(−.075; .143) (−.088; .158) (−.283; −.003) (−.018; .206)
Open in a new tab

Note: Adjusted for sex, multiple birth, parity, minority ethnicity, low parental education, neurosensory impairment, maternal age, foetal growth restriction, smoking during pregnancy. Boldface‐type indicates statistically significant differences.

Abbreviations: ALSPAC, Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children; BCS70, British Child Development Study; FT, Full‐Term; MCS: Millennium Cohort Study; MLPT, Moderate to Late Preterm; NCDS, National Child Development Study.

Hyperactivity in MLPT born children and adolescents

In early childhood, there were no significant differences between MLPT and FT born children in hyperactivity scores in all cohorts (Figure 1, Table 2). In late childhood, MLPT born children had higher levels of hyperactivity than FT born children in the two most recent cohorts (β = .208, 95% CI: .081; .334 and β = .158, 95% CI: .054; .261, respectively). In adolescence, MLPT group had higher scores of hyperactivity than the FT group only in the most recent cohort (β = .199, 95% CI: .073; .325).

Conduct problems in MLPT born children and adolescents

In early childhood, the MLPT and FT groups were not significantly different in conduct problems in any of the cohorts (Figure 1, Table 2). In late childhood, the MLPT group had significantly higher conduct problems in the earliest (β = .119, 95% CI: .023; .215) and most recent cohort (β = .136, 95% CI: .016; .255). On the other hand, in adolescence, the MLPT group had significantly lower scores in conduct problems in comparison to the FT group in the cohort born in 1991–1992 (β = −.143, 95% CI: −.283; −.003).

Sensitivity analyses

Sensitivity analysis comparing the LPT group separately with the FT born group showed consistent findings with the main analyses for emotional problems and hyperactivity; however, there was no significant difference between the two groups in conduct problems in any of the assessment points across all cohorts (Table S5). Furthermore, sensitivity analysis using imputed dataset revealed consistent results with main analyses (Table S6). When the full‐scales were used, findings regarding late childhood and adolescence remained consistent, and higher scores of emotional problems and hyperactivity were found in early childhood in the two most recent cohorts (ALSPAC and MCS, Table S7).

DISCUSSION

This study of four cohorts born between the late 1950s and the early 2000s in the UK showed that the difference between MLPT and FT born individuals in emotional problems and hyperactivity has increased in recent cohorts in comparison to cohorts born in 1958 and 1970. This was found in mother reports in late childhood and adolescence, whereas no significant differences were found in self‐reported emotional problems in adolescence. In contrast, no consistent trend between 1958 and 2000–2002 was found for maternal reports of conduct problems.

Our finding of an increase in mother‐reported emotional problems and hyperactivity in the UK during late childhood and adolescence in MLPT individuals born between the late 1950s and the early 2000s is contrary to our expectation of a decrease in these problems over the years given the advances in the prenatal and neonatal care (Dunn, 2007) and the decrease in the association between birth weight and cognitive abilities over the years in the UK (Goisis et al., 2017). However, this finding is in line with the previous studies showing higher emotional problems and hyperactivity levels in MLPT born children in comparison to FT born children in the recent cohorts (Faleschini, Matte‐Gagné, Côté, et al., 2020; Potijk et al., 2012). Furthermore, this finding is in line with studies showing that the quality of neurodevelopmental outcomes has not improved over time in VPT born children despite the improvements in neonatal care and higher survival rates (Cheong et al., 2020; Marlow et al., 2021). Our unique study adds to the existing literature given that this was not investigated for emotional and behavioural problems in children and adolescents before and in particular, not for MLPT born children and adolescents.

Since the 1970s, the incidence of emotional problems and hyperactivity in childhood and adolescence has increased on a population level in the UK (Collishaw, 2015; Collishaw et al., 2004). It has been suggested that this increase in emotional problems and hyperactivity in the general population could be due to societal changes in recent years such as a greater emphasis on academic performance and pressure to perform (Livingstone & Smith, 2014; Sweeting, West, Young, & Der, 2010; Twenge et al., 2010). It is possible that MLPT children are more vulnerable to the increased pressure to perform at school as they have more difficulties with academic performance, particularly maths (Wolke et al., 2015). In addition, MLPT born children represent a clinically distinct population since many of them are delivered for maternal medical complications during pregnancy (e.g., early delivery due to preeclampsia via cesarean section or induction of labour), which are consequently linked with increased rates of behavioural and emotional problems in children (Curran et al., 2016; Lahti‐Pulkkinen et al., 2020; Silva et al., 2014). Potential mechanisms for such associations include changes in placental and immune system, and hypothalamic‐pituitary‐adrenal axis functioning during pregnancy that may lead to foetal programming (Maher et al., 2018). Thus, there may be clinical reasons for the increase in emotional problems and hyperactivity in the recent years.

Alternatively, our findings could be explained by the increased awareness of mothers about the influence of preterm birth on the development of emotional and behavioural problems, which may be reflected in their ratings during recent years (Guralnick, 2012). Thus, our findings might actually reflect maternal perception of vulnerability of their MLPT born children and adolescents rather than actual differences in their behaviour. While being speculative, this interpretation is consistent with our finding that there are no significant differences between MLPT and FT groups in self‐reported emotional problems in adolescence. The low agreement in reports of emotional and behavioural problems between parent and child reports has also been shown previously in community studies (Achenbach et al., 2005) and in preterm samples (, 2016; Eves et al., 2020). Moreover, this finding of no difference between MLPT and FT born adolescents in self‐reported emotional problems is consistent with Festinger’s theory of social comparison (Festinger, 1954), which suggests that individuals compare themselves with those they socialise most often, that is their peers in the case of adolescents. On the other hand, mothers of MLPT born adolescents are more likely to compare their adolescents to the whole birth cohort (i.e., all adolescents), which could be associated with using a different comparison level and with reporting more emotional problems than adolescents themselves (Eves et al., 2020).

Perception of child vulnerability among mothers of preterm children could be due to preterm birth being an emotionally challenging event as it is often unexpected and associated with a higher risk of medical complications and neonatal difficulties (Horwitz et al., 2015). It has been suggested that mothers might continue to perceive their premature born child as vulnerable beyond the infancy period, which could result in overprotective parenting (Horwitz et al., 2015). Although there is evidence that maternal sensitive parenting is not influenced by preterm birth (Bilgin & Wolke, 2015), overprotective and controlling parenting behaviours in mothers of MLPT born children have been recently documented (Toscano et al., 2020) and were found to be linked with hyperactivity‐impulsivity levels from 4 to 8 years of age (Faleschini, Matte‐Gagné, Luu, et al., 2020). Nevertheless, it is unclear if the influence of overprotective parenting in mothers of MLPT born children on hyperactivity‐impulsivity levels has a longer‐lasting influence into late childhood and adolescence.

Our findings regarding mother‐reported conduct problems were less consistent than those relating to mother‐reported emotional problems and hyperactivity. MLPT born adolescents had lower scores in conduct problems in comparison to FT born adolescents in the ALSPAC cohort, which is in line with ‘preterm behavioural and personality phenotype’ which suggests that those born preterm are socially withdrawn and disinclined towards risk taking (Johnson & Wolke, 2013; Montagna & Nosarti, 2016). In contrast, our findings in late childhood showed higher levels of conduct problems in the MLPT group in comparison to the FT group in the 1958 cohort and in the 2000–2002 cohort. This finding is inconsistent with the preterm behavioural phenotype and should be explored in future research.

Despite the fact that MLPT children experience fewer neonatal complications and have a more mature brain size than VPT children, they are still born immature in comparison to FT children (Walsh et al., 2014). Considering the increasing number of MLPT birth survivors (Chawanpaiboon et al., 2019), our findings suggest that the teachers should be made aware of this risk and the particular increase in emotional problems and hyperactivity in late childhood and adolescence following MLPT birth in the recent years (Johnson, Gilmore, et al, 2015). Behavioural and emotional sequelae associated with MLPT birth is particularly important for employment and educational achievement during adulthood (Bilgin et al., 2018); thus, identification of problems during the school years would be helpful in improving the long‐term negative consequences on behavioural and emotional development.

The current study has several strengths including large cohort studies with participants who were born between the late 1950s and the early 2000s, measurement of the outcomes at three assessment points from childhood to adolescence and adjustment for several covariates. Moreover, we explored the consistency of our findings through several sensitivity analyses. Nevertheless, there are also limitations of the current study. First, the drop‐out rate was high, which is a common problem in longitudinal studies, where those at risk of medical and social problems are likely to drop‐out (Wolke et al., 2009). Nonetheless, the findings of the analysis with imputed data revealed a similar pattern of results, which suggests that the study attrition may not have influenced our findings. Second, mother reports were based on different scales in the older and recent cohorts (Rutter Scale and SDQ). Nonetheless, the SDQ was developed based on the Rutter Scale and they show high correlation (Goodman, 1997; Stone et al., 2010). In addition, we used only the most similar items from these two questionnaires. This approach of harmonisation of questionnaires was previously used to document trends in mental health across the UK cohorts (Collishaw et al., 2004). Third, self‐report measures of emotional problems were available only in three cohorts, where the scales were different between the oldest and the two newest cohorts. Last, the reliability scores of the harmonised scales were lower in comparison to the full sub‐scales, particularly in hyperactivity and conduct problems. However, sensitivity analyses using the complete scales revealed similar findings.

In conclusion, mother‐reported emotional problems and hyperactivity are increased in MLPT born children during late childhood and adolescence in the most recent cohort born in 2001–2002. On the other hand, the level of emotional problems reported by adolescents themselves were similar in the two groups in all cohorts. Future research should investigate the reasons associated with increasing mother‐reported emotional problems and hyperactivity in MLPT children in the recent years and whether increased academic demands played a role. Overall, the current findings highlight the importance of raising the awareness of teachers about the association between MLPT birth and behavioural and emotional problems in late childhood and adolescence to prevent the long‐term negative outcomes associated with the sequalae of MLPT birth.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

ETHICAL STATEMENT

Ethics Committee of the University of Warwick provided ethical approval for the current study and informed consent was obtained from all participants.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Ayten Bilgin: conceptualisation, methodology, investigation, formal analysis, visualisation, writing‐original draft; writing‐review and editing. Dieter Wolke: conceptualisation, funding acquisition, methodology, supervision, writing‐review and editing. Nicole Baumann: conceptualisation, methodology, writing‐review and editing. Hayley Trower: data curation, methodology, writing‐review and editing. Asteria Brylka: data curation, formal analysis, writing‐review and editing. Katri Räikkönen, Kati Heinonen, Eero Kajantie and Daniel Schnitzlein: funding acquisition, methodology, writing‐review and editing. Sakari Lemola: conceptualisation, funding acquisition, methodology, supervision, data curation, investigation, writing‐review and editing.

Supporting information

Supporting information 1

Click here for additional data file. (71KB, docx)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The research was funded by The Economic and Social Research Council New Opportunities for Research Funding Agency Co‐operation in Europe (NORFACE), for Life Course Dynamics after Preterm Birth: Protective Factors for Social and Educational Transitions, Health, and Prosperity, under grant number 462‐16‐040. The UK medical research council and the Wellcome Trust (Grant Ref: 102215/2/13/2) and the University of Bristol provide core support for ALSPAC. This publication is the work of the authors. Ayten Bilgin & Sakari Lemola serve as guarantors for its contents. The authors are extremely grateful to all the families who took part in these studies, the midwives for their help in recruiting them, and the whole NCDS, BCS70, ALSPAC and MCS study teams, which includes interviewers, computer and laboratory technicians, clerical workers, research scientists, volunteers, managers, receptionists and nurses. They are also grateful to the Centre for Longitudinal Studies, UCL, Institute of Education for the use of the data from the NCDS, BSC70 and MCS, and to the UK Data Archive for making them available; however, these bear no responsibility for the analysis or interpretation of these data. The authors have declared that they have no competing or potential conflicts of interest.

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.

REFERENCES

  1. Aarnoudse‐Moens, C. S. H. , Weisglas‐Kuperus, N. , van Goudoever, J. B. , & Oosterlaan, J. (2009). Meta‐analysis of neurobehavioral outcomes in very preterm and/or very low birth weight children. Pediatrics, 124(2), 717–728. 10.1542/peds.2008-2816 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Achenbach, T. M. , Krukowski, R. A. , Dumenci, L. , & Ivanova, M. Y. (2005). Assessment of adult psychopathology: meta‐analyses and implications of cross‐informant correlations. Psychological Bulletin, 131(3), 361–382. 10.1037/0033-2909.131.3.361 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Adams‐Chapman, I. (2006). Neurodevelopmental outcome of the late preterm infant. Clinics in Perinatology, 33(4), 947–964. 10.1016/j.clp.2006.09.004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Angold, A. , Costello, E. J. , Messer, S. C. , & Pickles, A. (1995). Development of a short questionnaire for use in epidemiological studies of depression in children and adolescents. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 5(4), 237–249. [Google Scholar]
  5. Baumann, N. , Bartmann, P. , & Wolke, D. (2016). Health‐related quality of life into adulthood after very preterm birth. Pediatrics, 137(4), e20153148. 10.1542/peds.2015-3148 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Bhutta, A. T. , Cleves, M. A. , Casey, P. H. , Cradock, M. M. , & Anand, K. J. S. (2002). Cognitive and behavioral outcomes of school‐aged children who were born preterm. Journal of the American Medical Association, 288(6), 728–737. 10.1001/jama.288.6.728 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bilgin, A. , Mendonca, M. , & Wolke, D. (2018). Preterm birth/low birth weight and markers reflective of wealth in adulthood: A meta‐analysis. Pediatrics, 142(1), e20173625. 10.1542/peds.2017-3625 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Bilgin, A. , & Wolke, D. (2015). Maternal sensitivity in parenting preterm children: A meta‐analysis. Pediatrics, 136(1), e177–e193. 10.1542/peds.2014-3570 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Boundy, E. O. , Dastjerdi, R. , Spiegelman, D. , Fawzi, W. W. , Missmer, S. A. , Lieberman, E. , Kajeepeta, S. , Wall, S. , & Chan, G. J. (2016). Kangaroo mother care and neonatal outcomes: A meta‐analysis. Pediatrics, 137(1), e20152238. 10.1542/peds.2015-2238 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Boyd, A. , Golding, J. , Macleod, J. , Lawlor, D. A. , Fraser, A. , Henderson, J. , Molloy, L. , Ness, A. , Ring, S. , & Davey Smith, G. (2013). Cohort profile: The 'Children of the 90s'‐the index offspring of the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. International Journal of Epidemiology, 42(1), 111–127. 10.1093/ije/dys064 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Chawanpaiboon, S. , Vogel, J. P. , Moller, A.‐B. , Lumbiganon, P. , Petzold, M. , Hogan, D. , Landoulsi, S. , Jampathong, N. , Kongwattanakul, K. , Laopaiboon, M. , Lewis, C. , Rattanakanokchai, S. , Teng, D. N. , Thinkhamrop, J. , Watananirun, K. , Zhang, J. , Zhou, W. , & Gülmezoglu, A. M. (2019). Global, regional, and national estimates of levels of preterm birth in 2014: a systematic review and modelling analysis. The Lancet Global Health, 7(1), e37–e46. 10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30451-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Cheong, J. L. , Spittle, A. J. , Burnett, A. C. , Anderson, P. J. , & Doyle, L. W. (2020). Have outcomes following extremely preterm birth improved over time? Seminars in Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, 25(3), 101114. 10.1016/j.siny.2020.101114 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Collishaw, S. (2015). Annual research review: Secular trends in child and adolescent mental health. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 56(3), 370–393. 10.1111/jcpp.12372 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Collishaw, S. , Maughan, B. , Goodman, R. , & Pickles, A. (2004). Time trends in adolescent mental health. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45(8), 1350–1362. 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00842.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Connelly, R. , & Platt, L. (2014). Cohort profile: UK Millennium Cohort Study (MCS). International Journal of Epidemiology, 43(6), 1719–1725. 10.1093/ije/dyu001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Costello, E. J. , & Angold, A. (1988). Scales to assess child and adolescent depression: checklists, screens, and nets. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 27(6), 726–737. 10.1097/00004583-198811000-00011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Curran, E. A. , Cryan, J. F. , Kenny, L. C. , Dinan, T. G. , Kearney, P. M. , & Khashan, A. S. (2016). Obstetrical mode of delivery and childhood behavior and psychological development in a British cohort. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 46(2), 603–614. 10.1007/s10803-015-2616-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. de Jong, M. , Verhoeven, M. , & van Baar, A. L. (2012). School outcome, cognitive functioning, and behaviour problems in moderate and late preterm children and adults: A review. Seminars in Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, 17(3), 163–169. 10.1016/j.siny.2012.02.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Dunn, P. M. (2007). The birth of perinatal medicine in the United Kingdom. Seminars in Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, 12(3), 227–238. 10.1016/j.siny.2007.02.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Eg, J. , Bilenberg, N. , Costello, E. J. , & Wesselhoeft, R. (2018). Self‐ and parent‐reported depressive symptoms rated by the mood and feelings questionnaire. Psychiatry Research, 268, 419–425. 10.1016/j.psychres.2018.07.016 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Elliott, J. , & Shepherd, P. (2006). Cohort profile: 1970 British Birth Cohort (BCS70). International Journal of Epidemiology, 35(4), 836–843. 10.1093/ije/dyl174 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Eves, R. , von Mühlenen, A. , Mendonça, M. , Johnson, S. , O'Reilly, H. , Bartmann, P. , Marlow, N. , & Wolke, D. (2020). The role of executive and general cognitive functioning in the attention problems of very and extremely preterm adults. Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 41(6), 461–469. 10.1097/dbp.0000000000000806 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Faleschini, S. , Matte‐Gagné, C. , Côté, S. , Tremblay, R. E. , & Boivin, M. (2020). Trajectories of behavioral problems among moderate‐late preterm children from 4 to 10 years: A prospective population‐based study. Early Human Development, 143, 104964. 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.104964 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Faleschini, S. , Matte‐Gagné, C. , Luu, T. M. , Côté, S. , Tremblay, R. E. , & Boivin, M. (2020). Trajectories of overprotective parenting and hyperactivity‐impulsivity and inattention among moderate‐late preterm children: A population‐based study. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 48(12), 1555–1568. 10.1007/s10802-020-00704-w [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Faul, F. , Erdfelder, E. , Lang, A.‐G. , & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140. 10.1177/001872675400700202 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  27. Fitzallen, G. C. , Sagar, Y. K. , Taylor, H. G. , & Bora, S. (2021). Anxiety and depressive disorders in children born preterm: A meta‐analysis. Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 42, 154–162. 10.1097/dbp.0000000000000898 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Fogelman, K. (1983). Growing up in Great Britain: Papers from the National Child Development Study. Macmillan. [Google Scholar]
  29. Fraser, A. , Macdonald‐Wallis, C. , Tilling, K. , Boyd, A. , Golding, J. , Davey Smith, G. , Henderson, J. , Macleod, J. , Molloy, L. , Ness, A. , Ring, S. , Nelson, S. M. , & Lawlor, D. A. (2013). Cohort Profile: the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children: ALSPAC mothers cohort. International Journal of Epidemiology, 42(1), 97–110. 10.1093/ije/dys066 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Goisis, A. , Özcan, B. , & Myrskylä, M. (2017). Decline in the negative association between low birth weight and cognitive ability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 114(1), 84–88. 10.1073/pnas.1605544114 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Goodman, R. (1997). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: a research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38(5), 581–586. 10.1111/j.1469-7610.1997.tb01545.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Gray, R. F. , Indurkhya, A. , & McCormick, M. C. (2004). Prevalence, stability, and predictors of clinically significant behavior problems in low birth weight children at 3, 5, and 8 years of age. Pediatrics, 114(3), 736–743. 10.1542/peds.2003-1150-L [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Guralnick, M. J. (2012). Preventive interventions for preterm children. Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 33(4), 352–364. 10.1097/DBP.0b013e31824eaa3c [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Gurka, M. J. , LoCasale‐Crouch, J. , & Blackman, J. A. (2010). Long‐term cognition, achievement, socioemotional, and behavioral development of healthy late‐preterm infants. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 164(6), 525–532. 10.1001/archpediatrics.2010.83 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Hadlock, F. P. , Harrist, R. B. , & Martinez‐Poyer, J. (1991). In utero analysis of fetal growth: a sonographic weight standard. Radiology, 181(1), 129–133. 10.1148/radiology.181.1.1887021 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Horwitz, S. M. , Storfer‐Isser, A. , Kerker, B. D. , Lilo, E. , Leibovitz, A. , St John, N. , & Shaw, R. J. (2015). A model for the development of mothers' perceived vulnerability of preterm infants. Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 36(5), 371–380. 10.1097/dbp.0000000000000173 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Huddy, C. L. J. , Johnson, A. , & Hope, P. L. (2001). Educational and behavioural problems in babies of 32‐35 weeks gestation. Fetal and Neonatal Edition, 85(1), 23F–28F. 10.1136/fn.85.1.f23 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Johnson, S. , Evans, T. A. , Draper, E. S. , Field, D. J. , Manktelow, B. N. , Marlow, N. , Matthews, R. , Petrou, S. , Seaton, S. E. , Smith, L. K. , & Boyle, E. M. (2015). Neurodevelopmental outcomes following late and moderate prematurity: A population‐based cohort study. Archives of Disease in Childhood‐Fetal and Neonatal Edition, 100(4), F301–F308. 10.1136/archdischild-2014-307684 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Johnson, S. , Gilmore, C. , Gallimore, I. , Jaekel, J. , & Wolke, D. (2015). The long‐term consequences of preterm birth: what do teachers know? Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 57(6), 571–577. 10.1111/dmcn.12683 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Johnson, S. , & Wolke, D. (2013). Behavioural outcomes and psychopathology during adolescence. Early Human Development, 89(4), 199–207. 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2013.01.014 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Lahti‐Pulkkinen, M. , Girchenko, P. , Tuovinen, S. , Sammallahti, S. , Reynolds, R. M. , Lahti, J. , Heinonen, K. , Lipsanen, J. , Hämäläinen, E. , Villa, P. M. , Kajantie, E. , Laivuori, H. , & Räikkönen, K. (2020). Maternal hypertensive pregnancy disorders and mental disorders in children. Hypertension, 75(6), 1429–1438. 10.1161/hypertensionaha.119.14140 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Livingstone, S. , & Smith, P. K. (2014). Annual research review: Harms experienced by child users of online and mobile technologies: the nature, prevalence and management of sexual and aggressive risks in the digital age. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 55(6), 635–654. 10.1111/jcpp.12197 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Maher, G. M. , O’Keeffe, G. W. , Kearney, P. M. , Kenny, L. C. , Dinan, T. G. , Mattsson, M. , & Khashan, A. S. (2018). Association of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy with risk of neurodevelopmental disorders in offspring. JAMA Psychiatry, 75(8), 809–819. 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.0854 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. March of Dimes, P. (2012). Born too soon: The global action report on preterm birth. Retrieved from Geneva. [Google Scholar]
  45. Marlow, N. , Ni, Y. , Lancaster, R. , Suonpera, E. , Bernardi, M. , Fahy, A. , , Larsen, J. , Trickett, J. , Hurst, J. R. , Morris, J. , Wolke, D. , & Johnson, S. (2021). No change in neurodevelopment at 11 years after extremely preterm birth. Archives of Disease in Childhood ‐ Fetal and Neonatal Edition. 10.1136/archdischild-2020-320650 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Mathewson, K. J. , Chow, C. H. T. , Dobson, K. G. , Pope, E. I. , Schmidt, L. A. , & Van Lieshout, R. J. (2017). Mental health of extremely low birth weight survivors: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 143(4), 347–383. 10.1037/bul0000091 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. McGowan, J. E. , Alderdice, F. A. , Holmes, V. A. , & Johnston, L. (2011). Early childhood development of late‐preterm infants: a systematic review. Pediatrics, 127(6), 1111–1124. 10.1542/peds.2010-2257 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Montagna, A. , & Nosarti, C. (2016). Socio‐emotional development following very preterm birth: Pathways to psychopathology. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(80). 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00080 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Morse, S. B. , Zheng, H. , Tang, Y. , & Roth, J. (2009). Early school‐age outcomes of late preterm infants. Pediatrics, 123(4), e622–e629. 10.1542/peds.2008-1405 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Philip, A. G. S. (2012). Bronchopulmonary dysplasia: Then and now. Neonatology, 102(1), 1–8. 10.1159/000336030 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Plewis, I. (2007). Millennium Cohort Study First Survey: Technical Report on Sampling (4th ed.). Centre for Longitudinal Studies, Institute of Education, University of London. [Google Scholar]
  52. Potijk, M. R. , de Winter, A. F. , Bos, A. F. , Kerstjens, J. M. , & Reijneveld, S. A. (2012). Higher rates of behavioural and emotional problems at preschool age in children born moderately preterm. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 97(2), 112–117. 10.1136/adc.2011.300131 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Power, C. , & Elliott, J. (2006). Cohort profile: 1958 British birth cohort (National Child Development Study). International Journal of Epidemiology, 35(1), 34–41. 10.1093/ije/dyi183 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Project, E.‐P. (2018). European Perinatal Health Report. Retrieved from www.europeristat.com [Google Scholar]
  55. Rhew, I. C. , Simpson, K. , Tracy, M. , Lymp, J. , McCauley, E. , Tsuang, D. , & Stoep, A. V. (2010). Criterion validity of the Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire and one‐ and two‐item depression screens in young adolescents. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, 4(1), 8. 10.1186/1753-2000-4-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Rodgers, B. , Pickles, A. , Power, C. , Collishaw, S. , & Maughan, B. (1999). Validity of the Malaise Inventory in general population samples. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 34(6), 333–341. 10.1007/s001270050153 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Rogers, C. E. , Lenze, S. N. , & Luby, J. L. (2013). Late preterm birth, maternal depression, and risk of preschool psychiatric disorders. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 52(3), 309–318. 10.1016/j.jaac.2012.12.005 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Rutter, M. , Tizard, J. , & Whitmore, K. (1970). Education, Health and Behaviour. Longman. [Google Scholar]
  59. Shapiro‐Mendoza, C. K. , & Lackritz, E. M. (2012). Epidemiology of late and moderate preterm birth. Seminars in Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, 17(3), 120–125. 10.1016/j.siny.2012.01.007 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Silva, D. , Colvin, L. , Hagemann, E. , & Bower, C. (2014). Environmental risk factors by gender associated with attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Pediatrics, 133(1), e14–e22. 10.1542/peds.2013-1434 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Stone, L. L. , Otten, R. , Engels, R. C. M. E. , Vermulst, A. A. , & Janssens, J. M. A. M. (2010). Psychometric properties of the parent and teacher versions of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire for 4‐ to 12‐year‐olds: a review. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 13(3), 254–274. 10.1007/s10567-010-0071-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Sweeting, H. , West, P. , Young, R. , & Der, G. (2010). Can we explain increases in young people's psychological distress over time? Social Science & Medicine, 71(10), 1819–1830. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.08.012 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Talge, N. M. , Holzman, C. , Wang, J. , Lucia, V. , Gardiner, J. , & Breslau, N. (2010). Late‐preterm birth and its association with cognitive and socioemotional outcomes at 6 years of age. Pediatrics, 126(6), 1124–1131. 10.1542/peds.2010-1536 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Toscano, C. , Soares, I. , & Mesman, J. (2020). Controlling parenting behaviors in parents of children born preterm: A meta‐analysis. Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 41(3), 230–241. 10.1097/dbp.0000000000000762 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Turner, N. , Joinson, C. , Peters, T. J. , Wiles, N. , & Lewis, G. (2014). Validity of the Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire in late adolescence. Psychological Assessment, 26(3), 752–762. 10.1037/a0036572 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Twenge, J. M. , Gentile, B. , DeWall, C. N. , Ma, D. , Lacefield, K. , & Schurtz, D. R. (2010). Birth cohort increases in psychopathology among young Americans, 1938‐2007: A cross‐temporal meta‐analysis of the MMPI. Clinical Psychology Review, 30(2), 145–154. 10.1016/j.cpr.2009.10.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. van Baar, A. L. , Vermaas, J. , Knots, E. , de Kleine, M. J. K. , & Soons, P. (2009). Functioning at school age of moderately preterm children born at 32 to 36 weeks' gestational age. Pediatrics, 124(1), 251–257. 10.1542/peds.2008-2315 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Walsh, J. M. , Doyle, L. W. , Anderson, P. J. , Lee, K. J. , & Cheong, J. L. Y. (2014). Moderate and late preterm birth: effect on brain size and maturation at term‐equivalent age. Radiology, 273(1), 232–240. 10.1148/radiol.14132410 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Westrupp, E. M. , Mensah, F. K. , Giallo, R. , Cooklin, A. , & Nicholson, J. M. (2012). Mental health in low‐to‐moderate risk preterm, low birth weight, and small for gestational age children at 4 to 5 years: the role of early maternal parenting. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 51(3), 313–323. 10.1016/j.jaac.2011.12.004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Wolke, D. , Strauss, V. Y.‐C. , Johnson, S. , Gilmore, C. , Marlow, N. , & Jaekel, J. (2015). Universal gestational age effects on cognitive and basic mathematic processing: 2 cohorts in 2 countries. The Journal of Pediatrics, 166(6), e14111412, 1410–1416. 10.1016/j.jpeds.2015.02.065 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Wolke, D. , Waylen, A. , Samara, M. , Steer, C. , Goodman, R. , Ford, T. , & Lamberts, K. (2009). Selective drop‐out in longitudinal studies and non‐biased prediction of behaviour disorders. British Journal of Psychiatry, 195(3), 249–256. 10.1192/bjp.bp.108.053751 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. Woythaler, M. A. , McCormick, M. C. , & Smith, V. C. (2011). Late preterm infants have worse 24‐month neurodevelopmental outcomes than term infants. Pediatrics, 127(3), e622–e629. 10.1542/peds.2009-3598 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Yates, R. , Treyvaud, K. , Doyle, L. W. , Ure, A. , Cheong, J. L. Y. , Lee, K. J. , Inder, T. E. , Spencer‐Smith, M. , & Anderson, P. J. (2020). Rates and stability of mental health disorders in children born very preterm at 7 and 13 years. Pediatrics, 145(5), e20192699. 10.1542/peds.2019-2699 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supporting information 1

Click here for additional data file. (71KB, docx)

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.

Articles from JCPP Advances are provided here courtesy of The Association for Child and Adolescent Mental Health and John Wiley & Sons Ltd

RESOURCES