Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37390081›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2023

Systematic review and theoretical comparison of children's outcomes in post-separation living arrangements.

Laura M Vowels, Chiara L Comolli, Laura Bernardi, Daniela Chacón-Mendoza, Joëlle Darwiche

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

Laura M VowelsFamily and Development Research Center (FADO), Institute of Psychology, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-5594-2095
Chiara L ComolliDepartment of Statistical Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Laura BernardiLIVES, Institute of Social Sciences, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Daniela Chacón-MendozaCenter for Research and Political Studies, University of Costa Rica, San José, Costa Rica.
Joëlle DarwicheFamily and Development Research Center (FADO), Institute of Psychology, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of the systematic review was to synthesize the literature on children's outcomes across different living arrangements (nuclear families, shared physical custody [SPC], lone physical custody [LPC]) by extracting and structuring relevant theoretical hypotheses (selection, instability, fewer resources, and stressful mobility) and comparing the empirical findings against these hypotheses. Following the PRISMA guidelines, the review included 39 studies conducted between January 2010-December 2022 and compared the living arrangements across five domains of children's outcomes: emotional, behavioral, relational, physical, and educational. The results showed that children's outcomes were the best in nuclear families but in 75% of the studies children in SPC arrangements had equal outcomes. Children in LPC tended to report the worst outcomes. When compared with the different theoretical hypotheses, the results were the most consistent with fewer resources hypothesis which suggests that children especially in LPC families have fewer relational and economic resources whereas children in SPC families are better able to maintain resources from both parents.

Indexed as

EmotionsNuclear FamilyChildEducational StatusHumansParentsPhysical Examination

Identifiers

PMID37390081
PMCPMC10313020

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.