SynthesisNeuropsychology review2019
Caregiver- and Clinician-Reported Adaptive Functioning in Rett Syndrome: a Systematic Review and Evaluation of Measurement Strategies.
Synthesis in Neuropsychology review, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review of Host Genomic Variation and Neuropsychological Outcomes for Pediatric Cancer Survivors.Neuropsychology review · 2023Pooled it
- Movement disorders in patients with Rett syndrome: A systematic review of evidence and associated clinical considerations.Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2021Pooled it
- Transcultural adaptation of the Adaptive Behavior Assessment System (ABAS-3).International journal of developmental disabilities · 2024Article
- Systematic review of reviews on Activities of Daily Living measures for children with developmental disabilities.Heliyon · 2022Article
- What activities individuals with intellectual disabilities do for fun: exploration into self-care.International journal of developmental disabilities · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rett syndrome is the second most common cause of intellectual disability in females worldwide. The severity of many individuals' impairment limits the effectiveness of traditional assessment. However, clinician and parent reports of adaptive functioning may provide insight into these patients' abilities. This review aims to synthesize the current literature assessing adaptive functioning in Rett syndrome and evaluate existing measurement tools in this population. A search was conducted on PubMed using the search term "Rett syndrome." Studies that quantitatively assessed adaptive functioning outcomes in Rett syndrome with published and normed questionnaire measures were included. Twenty-three studies met inclusion criteria. Overall results indicate that the population of people with Rett syndrome is highly impaired, both in overall adaptive functioning as well as in specific subdomains (e.g., mobility, activities of daily living). Atypical Rett syndrome groups performed better on measures of adaptive functioning relative to patients with classic Rett syndrome. Our findings identified measurement weaknesses, as many of the studies found floor effects and therefore were unable to capture meaningful variability in outcomes. Individuals with Rett syndrome are highly reliant on caregivers due to disrupted adaptive functioning abilities. Optimizing measurement of adaptive skills in Rett syndrome will facilitate the quantification of meaningful change in skills and the identification of efficacious interventions aimed at improving outcomes and quality of life.
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.