Skip to main content
Tessa NewsLink
Paste a health news link, or browse
Latest checks

Source study found

Story checked

Study reveals subtle neuroimaging differences after late preterm birth (opens in a new tab)

medicalxpress.com · 2026-10-16

Short answerEvidenceSource

Short answer

Mixed

Mixed.

The claims we could check match the study, but some claims were not covered by the evidence reviewed.

  • 3 supported
  • 4 not covered

Checked against the study summary. The full text wasn't available, so some details couldn't be settled either way.

Share this check

Follow the evidence trail
1
2

NewsLink checks it

Mixed

Every claim we could check holds up. Three of seven claims match the study. This overall rating is based only on the claims we could check. Four claims the study doesn't address.

  • 3 supported
  • 4 not covered
Open claim evidence
3
Then inspect each claim

Evidence layer

Claim by claim

Each claim gets a verdict. Expand it to see the evidence directly below.

7 claims in this story

Showing all 7 claimsChoose a verdict to focus the list.

Claim 1 of 7Not coveredLate preterm birth is defined as delivery at 34–36 weeks of gestation, a period of rapid brain development, and previous studies have had mixed findings about its long-term effects.View evidenceHide evidence

Why this verdict

The abstract-level profile supports the late-preterm definition as 34–36 weeks and identifies the comparison with full-term birth. However, the profile does not verify the background assertions that this is a period of rapid brain development or that prior long-term-effect studies have been mixed. At abstract depth, those parts of the lead claim are not verifiable.

1

Study evidence

Longitudinal mixed-effects models found no broad differences between late preterm and full-term groups in behavioral and emotional problems during early adolescence.

“using data from the large U.S.-based Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study, with longitudinal mixed-effects models used as the primary analytic framework to evaluate group, timepoint, and group-by-timepoint effects”
2

Study evidence

Longitudinal models showed no broad differences between late preterm and full-term groups in cortical thickness.

“Outcomes included ... structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)”
Claim 2 of 7Not coveredUsing ABCD Study data, the researchers compared 1,093 late preterm children with 8,984 full-term children aged 9–11 years and examined behavior, cognition, structural MRI, DTI and resting-state fMRI.View evidenceHide evidence

As stated1,093 late preterm children; 8,984 full-term children

Why this verdict

The profile supports use of ABCD data, baseline ages 9–11, comparison of late-preterm and full-term groups, and assessment of behavior/emotion, cognition, structural MRI, DTI, and resting-state fMRI. But the exact sample counts of 1,093 late-preterm and 8,984 full-term children are not reported in the abstract-level profile; the profile explicitly notes that abstract-level reporting does not provide sample size.

1

Study evidence

Longitudinal mixed-effects models found no broad differences between late preterm and full-term groups in behavioral and emotional problems during early adolescence.

“using data from the large U.S.-based Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study, with longitudinal mixed-effects models used as the primary analytic framework to evaluate group, timepoint, and group-by-timepoint effects”
2

Study evidence

Longitudinal models showed no broad differences between late preterm and full-term groups in cortical thickness.

“Outcomes included ... structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)”
Claim 3 of 7Not coveredThe clearest differences emerged from DTI, with group effects and group-by-timepoint interactions across selected white matter, cortical and subcortical measures, including the inferior longitudinal fasciculus.View evidenceHide evidence

Why this verdict

The profile supports that DTI showed the most prominent findings, with group effects and selected group-by-timepoint interactions in FA or MD metrics across selected white-matter tracts and cortical/subcortical ROIs. However, the story’s specific example, 'including the inferior longitudinal fasciculus,' is not verifiable from the abstract-level profile, which states that specific tracts/ROIs are not reported.

1

Study evidence

Significant group effects in DTI metrics: selected white matter tract and cortical/subcortical ROI FA or MD differed between late preterm and full-term children.

“Outcomes included ... diffusion tensor imaging (DTI)”
Claim 4 of 7Not coveredThe article says the study’s observational design, substantial follow-up attrition, only two timepoints, and retrospective gestational-age reporting limit interpretation.View evidenceHide evidence

As statedtwo assessment timepoints

Why this verdict

The observational nature of the study is supported by the profile. However, substantial follow-up attrition, exactly two timepoints, and retrospective gestational-age reporting are not provided in the abstract-level profile. These limitations may be in the full paper, but they are not verifiable at the supplied evidence depth.

1

Study evidence

Longitudinal mixed-effects models found no broad differences between late preterm and full-term groups in behavioral and emotional problems during early adolescence.

“using data from the large U.S.-based Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study, with longitudinal mixed-effects models used as the primary analytic framework to evaluate group, timepoint, and group-by-timepoint effects”
2

Study evidence

Longitudinal models showed no broad differences between late preterm and full-term groups in cortical thickness.

“Outcomes included ... structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)”
Claim 5 of 7SupportedThe longitudinal analysis found no broad late preterm versus full-term differences in behavioral and emotional problems, most cognitive outcomes, cortical thickness, cortical surface area, or resting-state functional connectivity.View evidenceHide evidence

Why this verdict

The profile reports no broad late-preterm versus full-term differences or group-by-timepoint interactions for behavioral/emotional problems, most cognitive outcomes, cortical thickness, cortical surface area, and resting-state fMRI within-network connectivity. The story’s wording preserves the 'most cognitive outcomes' qualification.

1

Study evidence

Longitudinal mixed-effects models found no broad differences between late preterm and full-term groups in behavioral and emotional problems during early adolescence.

“using data from the large U.S.-based Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study, with longitudinal mixed-effects models used as the primary analytic framework to evaluate group, timepoint, and group-by-timepoint effects”
2

Study evidence

Longitudinal models showed no broad differences between late preterm and full-term groups in cortical thickness.

“Outcomes included ... structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)”
Claim 6 of 7SupportedStructural MRI showed group differences in six regional brain volumes, but these measures did not show significant timepoint or group-by-timepoint effects after false discovery rate correction.View evidenceHide evidence

As statedsix regional brain volumes

Why this verdict

The structural MRI unit reports group effects in six regional brain volumes and no significant timepoint or group-by-timepoint effects for those volumetric findings, with FDR correction applied within outcome families. The story’s claim matches the abstract-level profile, although the profile does not provide the specific regions, directions, or effect sizes.

1

Study evidence

Longitudinal models showed no broad differences between late preterm and full-term groups in cortical thickness.

“Outcomes included ... structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)”
Claim 7 of 7SupportedThe authors said the findings suggest late preterm birth may have subtle effects and may not necessarily appear as broad behavioral or cognitive difficulties, while imaging may reveal regional differences in maturation not evident in everyday functioning.View evidenceHide evidence

Why this verdict

The claim is hedged and interpretive, and it aligns with the profile: behavioral/emotional and most cognitive findings were broadly null, while neuroimaging—especially DTI and some regional structural volumes—showed subtle, regionally specific differences. The profile supports the interpretation that imaging may reveal selective developmental or maturational differences not reflected as broad behavioral or cognitive problems.

1

Study evidence

Longitudinal mixed-effects models found no broad differences between late preterm and full-term groups in behavioral and emotional problems during early adolescence.

“using data from the large U.S.-based Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study, with longitudinal mixed-effects models used as the primary analytic framework to evaluate group, timepoint, and group-by-timepoint effects”
2

Study evidence

Longitudinal models showed no broad differences between late preterm and full-term groups in cortical thickness.

“Outcomes included ... structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)”
Then look for missing context

Context layer

What the story carried across

Nothing material from the study was dropped.

8 things the story did carry across
  • The paper is an observational secondary analysis of ABCD cohort participants categorized by gestational age, not a randomized or causal design.
  • Participants were late preterm children, defined as 34–36 gestational weeks, compared with full-term children defined in the profile as ≥40 weeks, at baseline ages 9–11.
  • Longitudinal mixed-effects models with group, timepoint, and group-by-timepoint effects were used, with FDR correction within predefined outcome families.
  • Behavioral/emotional outcomes and most cognitive outcomes showed no broad late-preterm versus full-term differences or group-by-timepoint interactions.
  • Structural MRI showed no broad cortical thickness or cortical surface area differences, but did show group effects in six regional brain volumes without significant timepoint or group-by-timepoint effects.
  • DTI was the most prominent neuroimaging finding, with significant group effects and selected group-by-timepoint interactions in FA or MD metrics across selected white-matter tracts and cortical/subcortical ROIs.
  • Resting-state fMRI within-network connectivity showed no broad group differences or group-by-timepoint interactions.
  • The abstract-level profile does not verify the story-mentioned limitations of substantial follow-up attrition, exactly two timepoints, or retrospective gestational-age reporting.
Then read the study layer

Study layer

Study at a glance

Scan the study first. Expand only the parts you want to inspect.

Pieces of work

4

Evidence read

study summary

Lead result

secondary data

1Lead resultsecondary dataCompare late preterm vs full-term groups on longitudinal multimodal neuroimaging outcomes (structural MRI regional volumes/cortical morphometry, DTI microstructure, resting-state fMRI connectivity) in early adolescence within the ABCD cohort using mixed-effects models.Longitudinal observational secondary-data DTI analysisExpand

In plain English

Within the ABCD cohort, late preterm (34–36 weeks) versus full-term (≥40 weeks) children showed subtle, regionally specific differences in diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) metrics during early adolescence (baseline ages 9–11), with significant group effects in fractional anisotropy (FA) or mean diffusivity (MD) for selected white matter tracts and cortical/subcortical ROIs and significant group-by-timepoint interactions for selected DTI metrics, identified using longitudinal mixed-effects models with FDR correction within outcome families.

Key findings

  • Significant group effects in DTI metrics: selected white matter tract and cortical/subcortical ROI FA or MD differed between late preterm and full-term children.
  • Significant group-by-timepoint interactions in selected DTI metrics, indicating differential longitudinal change between late preterm and full-term groups for some DTI measures.
“Outcomes included ... diffusion tensor imaging (DTI)”
What this piece can’t prove
  • Results are from secondary analysis of an observational cohort; abstract does not report potential confounder adjustment details.

2 further details could not be confirmed from the summary.

2secondary dataCompare late preterm (34–36 weeks) vs full-term birth groups on longitudinal behavioral/emotional and cognitive outcomes in early adolescence within the ABCD cohort using mixed-effects models.Longitudinal observational cohort comparison (secondary ABCD data)Expand

In plain English

In an observational analysis of ABCD cohort participants (baseline ages 9–11), children categorized as late preterm (34–36 weeks) were compared with full-term (≥40 weeks) children on longitudinal behavioral/emotional problems and cognitive function using mixed-effects models (Type III tests) with FDR correction within outcome families. Longitudinal models found no broad group differences or group-by-timepoint interactions for behavioral/emotional problems and for most cognitive outcomes.

Key findings

  • Longitudinal mixed-effects models found no broad differences between late preterm and full-term groups in behavioral and emotional problems during early adolescence.
  • Longitudinal mixed-effects models found no broad differences or group-by-timepoint interactions for most cognitive outcomes comparing late preterm and full-term children.
“using data from the large U.S.-based Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study, with longitudinal mixed-effects models used as the primary analytic framework to evaluate group, timepoint, and group-by-timepoint effects”
What this piece can’t prove
  • Observational secondary-data analysis; participants categorized by gestational age rather than randomly assigned.

3 further details could not be confirmed from the summary.

3secondary dataCompare late preterm vs full-term groups on longitudinal multimodal neuroimaging outcomes (structural MRI regional volumes/cortical morphometry, DTI microstructure, resting-state fMRI connectivity) in early adolescence within the ABCD cohort using mixed-effects models.Longitudinal mixed-effects secondary data analysisExpand

In plain English

Using ABCD cohort data (baseline age 9–11 years), longitudinal mixed-effects models compared late preterm (34–36 wks) versus full-term (≥40 wks) children on structural MRI morphometry (cortical thickness, cortical surface area) and regional brain volumes. The models found no broad LP–FT differences in cortical thickness or cortical surface area, and reported group effects in six regional brain volumes without significant timepoint or group×timepoint effects. False discovery rate correction was applied within predefined outcome families. The abstract does not report the specific regions, effect sizes, or details of MRI preprocessing and covariate adjustment.

Key findings

  • Longitudinal models showed no broad differences between late preterm and full-term groups in cortical thickness.
  • Longitudinal models showed no broad differences between late preterm and full-term groups in cortical surface area.
“Outcomes included ... structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)”
What this piece can’t prove

4 further details could not be confirmed from the summary.

4secondary dataCompare late preterm vs full-term groups on longitudinal multimodal neuroimaging outcomes (structural MRI regional volumes/cortical morphometry, DTI microstructure, resting-state fMRI connectivity) in early adolescence within the ABCD cohort using mixed-effects models.secondary data, longitudinal observational mixed-effects analysis (ABCD cohort)Expand

In plain English

Within the ABCD cohort, the study evaluated resting-state functional MRI (rs-fMRI) within-network connectivity longitudinally to compare children born late preterm (34–36 weeks) versus full term (≥40 weeks). Using mixed-effects longitudinal models with Type III tests and FDR correction within outcome families, the abstract reports no broad group differences or group-by-timepoint interactions for rs-fMRI within-network connectivity during early adolescence.

Key findings

  • No broad late preterm–full-term differences or group-by-timepoint interactions were observed in resting-state functional MRI within-network connectivity in early adolescence.
“Outcomes included ... resting-state functional MRI.”
What this piece can’t prove
  • Abstract does not report sample size for the rs-fMRI analyses, participant retention across timepoints, or demographic covariates included in models.
  • Abstract lacks details on rs-fMRI preprocessing, motion correction, denoising, and specific within-network definitions or parcellations used.

1 further detail could not be confirmed from the summary.

Finally, the search trail

Method layer

NewsLink found the paper. Tessa takes you deeper.

NewsLink checks the story. Tessa is where you inspect the paper, authors, evidence, and research context.

Papers considered

The selected paper, plus nearby candidates.

PubMed, Europe PMC, Crossref · 36 candidate papers

Candidate

Sonographic Evaluation of Liver Dimension among Apparently Healthy Pediatrics in Kano Metropolis, Nigeria

Nigerian Journal of Basic and Clinical Sciences · 2026 · Crossref

Source (opens in a new tab)

And 30 more candidates considered.