Evidence Hub

Associations Between Paternal Sensitivity and Cognitive and Behavioural Outcomes in Preterm Children: An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis

Gueron-Sela N, Treyvaud K, Atzaba-Poria N, Cheong J, Spittle A, Yatziv T, Anderson PJ, Jaekel J

Child: care, health and development, 2026

207 participants

Abstract

Background: Children born preterm (PT) face elevated neurodevelopmental risk, yet the role of fathers' sensitive caregiving in this process remains understudied.

Objective: To test whether observed paternal sensitivity predicts cognitive and behavioural outcomes in PT children and moderates prematurity-related risk.

Methods: Individual participant data (IPD) from two prospective cohorts in Australia and Israel (2009-2014) were pooled (N = 207; 151 PT, 56 term). Father-child and mother-child dyadic interactions at 6-12 months corrected age were observed and coded with the emotional availability (EA) sensitivity scale. Child cognition and behaviour were assessed at 5 years of age. Mixed-effects regressions controlled for sex, age, multiple birth, small-for-gestational-age status and maternal education.

Results: Higher paternal sensitivity predicted higher cognitive scores (β = 0.25 per SD, 95% confidence interval = [0.09, 0.41], p < 0.003). Paternal sensitivity was not related to children's later behavioural problems (-0.003 [-0.21, 0.20], p = 0.981). No gestational age × paternal sensitivity interaction emerged.

Conclusions: Sensitive fathering confers an additive, clinically meaningful benefit for cognitive function in both PT and term children, over and above social and medical risk. Early-intervention programs that actively engage fathers and support sensitive responsive interactions may enhance developmental trajectories in this vulnerable population.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 207 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free