Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34777114›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2021

Comparing Face-to-Face and Online Data Collection Methods in Preterm and Full-Term Children: An Exploratory Study.

Paige M Nelson, Francesca Scheiber, Haley M Laughlin, Ö Ece Demir-Lira

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Evaluating the Equivalency of Teletesting and the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Measures of Reading Achievement in a Clinically Referred Sample.Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Conducting Developmental Research Online vs. In-Person: A Meta-Analysis.Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. 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.

Paige M NelsonDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States.
Francesca ScheiberDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States.
Haley M LaughlinDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States.
Ö Ece Demir-LiraDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States.

Funding

University of Iowa Hawkeye Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Research Center (Hawk-IDDRC)P50HD103556 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI EDWIN TED G. ABEL, Lane Strathearn · 2021 to 2026
$8.5M
Mechanisms of Health and Disease at the Behavioral-Biomedical InterfaceT32GM108540 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI LUTGENDORF, SUSAN K, VOSS, MICHELLE WEBB · 2014 to 2023
$1.7M
Identifying Relationships between Late Premature Birth, Parental Factors, and Early Numerical and Spatial DevelopmentR03HD102449 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI DEMIR-LIRA, ECE · 2020 to 2021
$212k
Neonatal Morbidities and Psychological Processes Underlying the Association Between Preterm Birth and ADHDF31HD094529 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI MOMANY, ALLISON MARIE · 2018 to 2019
$71k
NICHD NIH HHS F31 HD094529NICHD NIH HHS P50 HD103556NICHD NIH HHS R03 HD102449NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM108540
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed the landscape for children's daily lives and the landscape for developmental psychology research. Pandemic-related restrictions have also significantly disrupted the traditional face-to-face methods with which developmental scientists produce research. Over the past year, developmental scientists have published on the best practices for online data collection methods; however, existing studies do not provide empirical evidence comparing online methods to face-to-face methods. In this study, we tested feasibility of online methods by examining performance on a battery of standardized and experimental cognitive assessments in a combined sample of 4- to 5-year-old preterm and full-term children, some of whom completed the battery face-to-face, and some of whom completed the battery online. First, we asked how children's performance differs between face-to-face and online format on tasks related to verbal comprehension, fluid reasoning, visual spatial, working memory, attention and executive functioning, social perception, and numerical skills. Out of eight tasks, we did not find reliable differences on five of them. Second, we explored the role of parent involvement in children's performance in the online format. We did not find a significant effect of parent involvement on children's performance. Exploratory analyses showed that the role of format did not vary for children at risk, specifically children born preterm. Our findings contribute to the growing body of literature examining differences and similarities across various data collection methods, as well as literature surrounding online data collection for continuing developmental psychology research.

Indexed as

childrenCOVID-19developmental psychologyin-person data collectionneurocognitive assessmentonline data collectionprematurity

Identifiers

PMID34777114
PMCPMC8581355

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.