Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34211253›Full record

ArticleInfants and young children

Developing a Screening Tool for Young Children Using an Ecological Framework.

Carmela J DeCandia, Katherine T Volk, George J Unick, Laura Rose W Donegan

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Infants and young children. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Carmela J DeCandiaArtemis Associates, Watertown, MA, USA.
Katherine T VolkC4 Innovations, Needham, MA, USA.
George J UnickUniversity of Maryland, School of Social Work, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Laura Rose W DoneganC4 Innovations, Needham, MA, USA.
C-2 Innovations (United States) · USArtemis (United States) · USUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore · US

Funding

Child Assessment Tool for Use in Resource Limited SettingsR44HD088291 · NICHD · C4 INNOVATIONS, LLC · PI DECANDIA, CARMELA, VOLK, KATHERINE · 2016 to 2018
$933k
NICHD NIH HHS R44 HD088291
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Young children from impoverished backgrounds experience high levels of family and environmental stress, adversely impacting developmental functioning. Early identification provides a pathway to solutions, but many children are never assessed. In addition, the child-serving workforce lacks resources and expertise to use traditional measures. Furthermore, existing measures do not account for the substantial influence of a child's ecology. To bridge these gaps, we developed the Neurodevelopmental Ecological Screening Tool (NEST) and conducted a pilot study (n=60) to test its feasibility for use with caregivers of children ages 3-5 in low-resource settings. We developed an item pool across three domains (child, caregiver, environment), vetted it with experts, and conducted cognitive interviewing with parents (n=15) and case managers (n-10). Simultaneously, we built an online, user-friendly delivery platform. We used a one parameter Item Response Model and a Rasch-based Rating Scale Model (RSM) and fit confirmatory factor analytic (CFA) models to test for unidimensional and construct validity. The results support the feasibility of screening children from low SES populations within low-resource settings using an ecological perspective and supports the work of child-serving paraprofessionals in identifying and addressing risks in the lives of young children.

Indexed as

ChildDevelopmentalEcologicalLow-incomeScreener

Identifiers

PMID34211253
PMCPMC8240794
OpenAlexW3080686076

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.