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

Abstract

AbstractAimTo assess the inter‐assessor reliability of the Motor Optimality Score‐Revised (MOS‐R) when used in infants at elevated likelihood for adverse neurological outcome.MethodsMOS‐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.Results252 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.ConclusionThe 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.