Effects of SAFE Early Intervention Approach in the First Months of Life in Infants at Risk: A Randomized Controlled Study.

Only 26 infants completed the study out of 32 eligible, and the sample was drawn from a single rehabilitation unit in Turkey. The evaluators and treating therapists knew which group each infant was in, so outcome scoring was not blinded. Follow-up lasted only 12 weeks; the authors note that cognitive effects may not be visible at this time point and that long-term follow-up is needed. Inclusion criteria covered a broad range of risk factors (preterm, HIE, infection, growth restriction) rather than a specific diagnosis, making it hard to tell which subgroups benefited most. The sensory processing outcomes come from the ITSP-2, a parent-completed questionnaire, rather than an objective behavioural measure. The SAFE programme was developed and delivered by the same department that designed the study, and the authors declare no external funding or conflicts.

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. No funding source is named in the text.

Do not read this as evidence that SAFE outperforms NDT across all developmental domains. The cognitive and language scores improved in both groups with no significant between-group difference, and the sensory findings rest on a parent-completed questionnaire rather than an objective measure. With 26 infants assessed by therapists who knew the group assignment, the motor advantage could reflect expectation or regression to the mean rather than a true treatment effect.