SynthesisPloS one2021
The predictive value of universal preschool developmental assessment in identifying children with later educational difficulties: A systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2021. 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, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictive Validity of Developmental Screening Questionnaires for Identifying Children With Later Cognitive or Educational Difficulties: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2021Pooled it
- Developmental screening at 18 months using the Nipissing District Developmental Screen.Paediatrics & child health · 2025Article
- A non-specialist worker delivered digital assessment of cognitive development (DEEP) in young children: A longitudinal validation study in rural India.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Clinical utility and psychometric properties of tools for early detection of developmental concerns and disability in young children: A scoping review.Developmental medicine and child neurology · 2025Article
- Screening for developmental delay at 18 months using the Infant Toddler Checklist: A validation study.PloS one · 2025Article
- Parental Education and Unmet Therapeutic Needs Among School-Aged Children With Developmental Delays: A Pooled Cross-Sectional Survey in Aachen, Germany.International journal of public health · 2025Article
- Early child development in England: cross-sectional analysis of ASQInternational journal of population data science · 2024Article
- Mapping Geographic Trends in Early Childhood Social, Emotional, and Behavioural Difficulties in Glasgow: 2010-2017.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Predictive validity of the Infant Toddler Checklist in primary care at the 18-month visit and developmental diagnosis at 3-5 years: a prospective cohort study.BMJ paediatrics open · 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
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDevelopmental delay affects substantial proportions of children. It can generally be identified in the pre-school years and can impact on children's educational outcomes, which in turn may affect outcomes across the life span. High income countries increasingly assess children for developmental delay in the early years, as part of universal child health programmes, however there is little evidence as to which measures best predict later educational outcomes. This systematic review aims to assess results from the current literature on which measures hold the best predictive value, in order to inform the developmental surveillance aspects of universal child health programmes.
methodsSystematic review sources: Medline (2000 -current), Embase (2000 -current), PsycInfo (2000 -current) and ERIC (2000 -current). Additional searching of birth cohort studies was undertaken and experts consulted. Eligibility criteria: Included studies were in English from peer reviewed papers or books looking at developmental assessment of preschool children as part of universal child health surveillance programmes or birth cohort studies, with linked results of later educational success/difficulties. The study populations were limited to general populations of children aged 0-5 years in high income countries. Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were carried out by two independent authors and any disagreement discussed. PROSPERO registration number CRD42018103111.
resultsThirteen studies were identified for inclusion in the review. The studies were highly heterogeneous: age of children at first assessment ranged from 1-5 years, and at follow-up from 4-26 years. Type of initial and follow-up assessment also varied. Results indicated that, with the exception of one study, the most highly predictive initial assessments comprised combined measures of children's developmental progress, such as a screening tool alongside teacher ratings and developmental histories. Other stand-alone measures also performed adequately, the best of these being the Ages and Stages Questionnaire (ASQ). Latency between measures, age of child at initial measurement, size of studies and quality of studies all impacted on the strength of results.
conclusionsThis review was the first to systematically assess the predictive value of preschool developmental assessment at a population level on later educational outcomes. Results demonstrated consistent associations between relatively poor early child development and later educational difficulties. In general, specificity and Negative Predictive Value are high, suggesting that young children who perform well in developmental assessment are unlikely to go on to develop educational difficulties, however the sensitivity and Positive Predictive Values were generally low, indicating that these assessments would not meet the requirements for a screening test. For surveillance purposes, however, findings suggested that combined measures provided the best results, although these are resource intensive and thus difficult to implement in universal child health programmes. Health service providers may therefore wish to consider using stand-alone measures, which also were shown to provide adequate predictive value, such as the ASQ.
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.