Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38939558›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in public health2024

Guidelines and best practices for assessing young children remotely.

Kyla Z McRoy, Lori E Skibbe, Sammy F Ahmed, Burcu H Tatar

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in public health, 2024. 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

4 authors.

Kyla Z McRoyEarly Language and Literacy Investigations Lab, Department of Human Development and Family Science, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United States.
Lori E SkibbeEarly Language and Literacy Investigations Lab, Department of Human Development and Family Science, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United States.
Sammy F AhmedDepartment of Human Development and Family Science, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI, United States.
Burcu H TatarEarly Language and Literacy Investigations Lab, Department of Human Development and Family Science, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Given the recent rise in the use of remote assessments to collect data from young children, researchers and practitioners would benefit from guidance on best practices within the field. Based on our experiences with assessing over 600 preschoolers remotely, our research team provides a set of main principles to guide professionals to successfully create and operationalize systems for remote assessment. Guidelines include detailed information about how to choose a technology platform, select and use online assessments, and how to adapt traditional tasks for remote use. We also note the challenges inherent in using certain types of tasks, provide tips for scheduling remote sessions, and offer advice for how to promote children's engagement throughout the assessment process.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicChildChild, PreschoolGuidelines as TopicHumansassessmentchildrendevelopmentpreschoolremote

Identifiers

PMID38939558
PMCPMC11208674

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.