Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34831937›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Identifying and Minimizing Errors in the Measurement of Early Childhood Development: Lessons Learned from the Cognitive Testing of the ECDI2030.

Claudia Cappa, Nicole Petrowski, Elga Filipa De Castro, Emily Geisen, Patricia LeBaron, Betania Allen-Leigh, Jean Marie Place, Paul J Scanlon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
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

8 authors.

Claudia CappaUnited Nations Children's Fund, New York, NY 10017, USA.
Nicole PetrowskiUnited Nations Children's Fund, New York, NY 10017, USA.
Elga Filipa De CastroUnited Nations Children's Fund, New York, NY 10017, USA.
Emily GeisenQualtrics, Raleigh, NC 27603, USA.
Patricia LeBaronRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA.
Betania Allen-LeighInstituto Nacional de Salud Pública, Cuernavaca, Morelos 62100, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-9097-2553
Jean Marie PlaceDepartment of Nutrition and Health Science, Ball State University, Muncie, IN 47303, USA.
Paul J ScanlonNational Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, MD 20782, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Challenges in measuring early childhood development (ECD) at scale have been documented, yet little is known about the specific difficulties related to questionnaire design and question interpretation. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the challenges of measuring ECD at scale in the context of household surveys and to show how to overcome them. The paper uses examples from the cognitive interviewing exercises that were conducted as part of the methodological work to develop a measure of ECD outcomes, the ECDI2030. It describes the methodological work carried out to inform the selection and improvement of question items and survey implementation tools as a fundamental step to reduce and mitigate systematic measurement error and improve data quality. The project consisted of a total of five rounds of testing, comprising 191 one-on-one, in-depth cognitive interviews across six countries (Bulgaria, India, Jamaica, Mexico, Uganda, and the USA). Qualitative data analysis methods were used to determine matches and mismatches between intention of items and false positives or false negative answers among subgroups of respondents. Key themes emerged that could potentially lead to systematic measurement error in population-based surveys on ECD: (1) willingness of child to perform task versus ability of child to perform task; (2) performing task versus performing task correctly; (3) identifying letters or numbers versus recognizing letters or numbers; (4) consistently performing task versus correctly performing task; (5) applicability of skills being asked versus observability of skills being asked; and (6) language production versus language comprehension. Through an iterative process of testing and subsequent revision, improvements were made to item wording, response options, and interviewer training instructions. Given the difficulties inherent in population-level data collection in the context of global monitoring, this study's findings confirm the importance of cognitive testing as a crucial step in careful, culturally relevant, and sensitive questionnaire design and as a means to reduce response bias in cross-cultural contexts.

Indexed as

LanguageResearch DesignChildChild DevelopmentChild, PreschoolHumansNeuropsychological TestsSurveys and Questionnairescognitive testingcultural relevanceearly childhoodquestionnaire design

Identifiers

PMID34831937
PMCPMC8618056

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.