ArticleInfant and child development
Adapting Open Science and Pre-registration to Longitudinal Research.
Article in Infant and child development. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhancing the utility of exploratory 'factors associated with' studies in global mental health: the importance of context in Sub-Saharan Africa.International journal of mental health systems · 2026Article
- Commentary: Making Patient Data Count-Opportunities and Challenges for Open Science in Clinical Psychology.Journal of clinical psychology · 2026Article
- Article
- The development of real-time spoken and word recognition derives from changes in ability, not maturation.Cognition · 2024Article
- A practical guide to cross-cultural and multi-sited data collection in the biological and behavioural sciences.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Shedding light on functional near-infrared spectroscopy and open science practices.Neurophotonics · 2023Article
- I'm not sure that curve means what you think it means: Toward a [more] realistic understanding of the role of eye-movement generation in the Visual World Paradigm.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2023Review
- Passive and social screen time in children with autism and in association with obesity.Frontiers in pediatrics · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Open science practices, such as pre-registration and data sharing, increase transparency and may improve the replicability of developmental science. However, developmental science has lagged behind other fields in implementing open science practices. This lag may arise from unique challenges and considerations of longitudinal research. In this paper, preliminary guidelines are provided for adapting open science practices to longitudinal research to facilitate researchers' use of these practices. The guidelines propose a serial and modular approach to registration that includes an initial pre-registration of the methods and focal hypotheses of the longitudinal study, along with subsequent pre- or co-registered questions, hypotheses, and analysis plans associated with specific papers. Researchers are encouraged to share their research materials and relevant data with associated papers, and to report sufficient information for replicability. In addition, there should be careful consideration about requirements regarding the timing of data sharing, to avoid disincentivizing longitudinal research.
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.