ReviewCampbell systematic reviews2023
Centre-based early education interventions for improving school readiness: A systematic review.
Review in Campbell systematic reviews, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adapting a school readiness intervention for children with sickle cell disease: an intervention mapping for adaptation approach.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- The effect of metalinguistic awareness on bilingual vocabulary knowledge in Chinese deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) students.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Campbell and Cochrane evidence on promoting cognitive capacity across life course: a mapping review.Age and ageing · 2025Article
- Centre-based early education interventions for improving school readiness: A systematic review.Campbell systematic reviews · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Globally, children are legally obliged to attend school at a certain age (ranging from 4 to 7 years old). Developmental differences are rarely considered at school entry nor are they always reflected in the teaching and learning environment. Children who start school without being ready to cope may be significantly disadvantaged. Failure at school can impact directly on long-term outcomes such as unemployment, crime, adolescent pregnancy, and psychological and physical morbidity in adulthood. In contrast, experiencing success at school can impact positively on a child's self esteem, behaviour, attitude, and future outcomes. School readiness interventions aim to prepare a child for the academic content of education and the psychosocial competencies considered important for learning such as self-regulation, listening, following instructions and learning to share in play and other social settings. There is a need for evidence of the effectiveness of centre-based school readiness interventions. Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of centre-based interventions for improving school readiness in preschool children. Search Methods: In October 2021 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ERIC, PsycINFO, ERIC, eight additional databases and three trials registers. Other eligible studies were identified through handsearches of reference lists, reports, reviews and relevant websites. Selection Criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing centre-based school readiness interventions to no intervention, wait-list control or treatment as usual (TAU) for children (aged three to 7 years before starting compulsory education). The primary outcomes were school readiness and adverse effects. Data Collection and Analysis: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. Main Results: We included data from 32 trials involving 16,899 children (6590 included in at least one meta-analysis). Four studies compared centre-based early education interventions with no treatment controls. Twenty-two trials compared an enriched school curriculum to treatment as usual (TAU). Children were aged between 3 and 7 years old (mean age 4.4 years), 51.7% were boys and at least 70% were from a racial/ethnic minority group. Most studies were conducted in the USA and mainly located in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation. Interventions were delivered in centre-based settings (pre-kindergarten or elementary schools), for at least one half day, 4 days per week over the academic year. Follow-up ranged from up to 1 year (short-term), 1-2 years (medium-term) and over 2 years (long-term). We judged the certainty of evidence to be very low to moderate across all outcome measures. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence because the included studies were at an unclear or high risk of bias due to poor reporting, imprecision arising from small sample sizes and wide confidence intervals, and inconsistency due to statistical heterogeneity. Most studies were considered to be low or unclear risk for selection, detection, performance, attrition, selective reporting, and other bias. Allocation bias was at high risk in 10 studies. The US federal government funded most of the studies. Authors' Conclusions: We found very low, low and moderate-certainty evidence that centre-based interventions convey little to no difference to children starting school compared to no intervention or TAU, up to 1 year. More research, measuring relevant outcomes, conducted outside the USA, is required to improve programmes designed to meet the needs of children starting school.
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.