Trial reportPloS one2019
How is your mind-set? Proof of concept for the measurement of the level of emotional development.
Trial report in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Psychometric Properties of Emotional Development Assessment tools in Intellectual Disabilities: A Systematic Review.Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR · 2025Pooled it
- [Emotional development in individuals with intellectual disability: clinical and therapeutic perspectives].Der Nervenarzt · 2026Review
- Comparing Emotional Development in Persons With Intellectual Disability With and Without Autism Spectrum Disorder.Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR · 2025Article
- Outcomes of an Intervention Programme for People With Intellectual Disabilities and Behavioural Concerns Based on Emotional Development.Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR · 2025Article
- Psychometric Properties of the Questionnaire Epistemic Trust in People With Mild to Moderate Intellectual Disabilities or Borderline Intellectual Functioning.Journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID · 2025Article
- Experiences of Second-Grade Primary School Children and Their Teachers in a Mind-Body Activity Program: A Descriptive Qualitative Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Validation of the Scale of Emotional Development-Short (SED-S) in Healthy Adults with an Intellectual Disability.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- More than a Physical Problem: The Effects of Physical and Sensory Impairments on the Emotional Development of Adults with Intellectual Disabilities.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Developmental Delays in Socio-Emotional Brain Functions in Persons with an Intellectual Disability: Impact on Treatment and Support.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities, not only cognitive brain functions, but also socio-emotional processing networks may be impaired. This study aims to validate the Scale of Emotional Development-Short (SED-S) to provide an instrument for the assessment of socio-emotional brain functions.
methodThe SED-S was applied in 160 children aged 0-12 years. Criterion validity was investigated at item and scale level in terms of the agreement between the scale classification and the child's chronological age. Additionally, interrater reliability and internal consistency were assessed.
resultsFor the majority of items, the expected response pattern emerged, showing the highest response probabilities in the respective target age groups. Agreement between the classification of the different SED-S domains and chronological age was high (κw = 0.95; exact agreement = 80.6%). Interrater reliability at domain level ranged from κw = .98 to 1.00 and internal consistency was high (α = .99).
conclusionThe study normed the SED-S in a sample of typically developing children and provides evidence for criterion validity on item, domain and scale level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.