ReviewFrontiers in public health2023
Review in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Involvement of children and young people in the conduct of health research: A rapid umbrella review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Pooled it
- Community engagement in early childhood development intervention trials: lessons learnt from a stepping stones program in rural India.Frontiers in public health · 2025Trial
- Monitoring, evaluation, and learning: the key to building effective partnerships with government to improve maternal and child health in the Rakai and Kyotera Districts of Uganda.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Piloting, testing and scaling parental training: a multi-partnership approach in Côte d'Ivoire.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Integrating father involvement into early childhood initiatives delivered at scale: key considerations.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Measuring for change/Mobile Creches.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this review paper, we explore how on-the-ground Early Childhood Development (ECD) innovators are using monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) systems to guide the design and implementation of ECD programs, as well as how MEL systems can influence policy and support the achievement of impact at scale. We reflect on articles in the
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.