ArticleBMJ open2021
Caregiver-mediated interventions to support self-regulation among infants and young children (0-5 years): a protocol for a realist review.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring predictors of interaction among low-birth-weight infants and their caregivers: a machine learning-based random forest approach.BMC pediatrics · 2024Article
- A vision for implementing equitable early mental health and resilience support in pediatric primary care: A transdiagnostic, developmental approach.Families, systems & health : the journal of collaborative family healthcare · 2024Article
- Don't Get Lost in Translation: Integrating Developmental and Implementation Sciences to Accelerate Real-World Impact on Children's Development, Health, and Wellbeing.Frontiers in public health · 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
16 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSelf-regulation is a modifiable protective factor for lifespan mental and physical health outcomes. Early caregiver-mediated interventions to promote infant and child regulatory outcomes prevent long-term developmental, emotional and behavioural difficulties and improve outcomes such as school readiness, educational achievement and economic success. To harness the population health promise of these programmes, there is a need for more nuanced understanding of the impact of these interventions. The aim of this realist review is to understand how, why, under which circumstances and for whom, early caregiver-mediated interventions improve infant and child self-regulation. The research questions guiding this review were based on consultation with families and community organisations that provide early childhood and family services. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Realist reviews take a theory-driven and iterative approach to evidence synthesis, structured around continuous refinement of a programme theory. Programme theories specify context-mechanism-outcome configurations to explain what works, for whom, under which circumstances and how. Our initial programme theory is based on prior work in this field and will be refined through the review process. A working group, comprising service users, community organisation representatives, representatives from specific populations, clinicians and review team members will guide the evidence synthesis and interpretation, as well as the development and dissemination of recommendations based on the findings of the review. The review will involve searching: (i) electronic databases, (ii) connected papers, articles and citations and (iii) grey literature. Decisions to include evidence will be guided by judgements about their contribution to the programme theory and will be made by the research team, with input from the working group. Evidence synthesis will be reported using the Realist and MEta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards guidelines. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as this is a review. Findings will be disseminated to our working group and through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: The protocol is registered with Open Science Framework https://osf.io/5ce2z/registrations.
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.