Cohort study reveals lower developmental outcomes in infants during COVID-19, suggesting communication skills may be significantly impacted.
Objective To determine if developmental outcomes differed at 24 months between US children born before and during the pandemic. Design This retrospective cohort study included children completing a 24-month well visit between 1 March 2019 and 31 December 2022. Setting : a university-affiliated primary care clinic Patients Children were born at term and divided into three cohorts: prepandemic (born on or after 14 January 2017 and before 1 March 2018), transitional (born on or after 1 March 2018 and before 1 March 2020), and pandemic (born on or after 1 March 2020 and before 1 January 2021). Main outcomes/measures Main outcomes included 24-month Ages & Stages Questionnaire (ASQ-3) domain scores, total score and percentage of children classified as atypical (≥1 SD below the domain mean). Multivariable regression adjusted for child age, sex and insurance. For the transitional cohort, regression models assessed relationships between ASQ-3 measures and duration of pandemic exposure. Results Of 604 children, most were Hispanic/Latino (37%) or Black (26%) and on government-sponsored insurance (77%). Compared with prepandemic, pandemic children scored lower for total ASQ-3 (250 vs 262, p=0.03), communication (45 vs 49, p=0.02) and personal-social (49 vs 52, p=0.03) and had higher odds of atypical scores for fine motor (2.2, 95% CI 1.2 to 4.2; p=0.01), with males more likely to have atypical scores for communication (2.2, 95% CI 1.2 to 4.0; p=0.03) and fine motor (2.3, 95% CI 1.0 to 5.0; p=0.04). For the transitional cohort, pandemic exposure was negatively associated with total ASQ-3 (p=0.048), communication (p=0.02) and personal-social (p=0.03). Conclusions Findings suggest a negative association of the COVID-19 pandemic with early child development, especially for emerging language and socioemotional skills, with males likely affected more than females.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Domek et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: