ArticlePloS one2024
Systematic review and meta-analysis of developmental assets scales: A study protocol for psychometric properties.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsApplication of developmental assets, one of existing Positive Youth Development (PYD) frameworks, has gained momentum in research, policy formulations, and interventions, necessitating the introduction of the most efficient scales for this framework. The present study protocol aims to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of developmental assets scales to document the underlying logic, objectives, and methodologies earmarked for the identification, selection, and critical evaluation of these scales. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P), the intended search will encompass databases of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Knowledge, and PsycINFO, spanning from the inception of 1988 to 1st of April 2024. The review will include articles published published in English language focusing on individuals aged 10 to 29 years and reporting at least one type of reliability or validity of developmental assets scales. The review process will be in compliance with the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN), and the overall quality of evidence will be determined using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) guidelines. DISCUSSION: This comprehensive assessment aims to identify potential biases in prior research and offer guidance to scholars regarding the optimal scales for developmental assets in terms of validity, reliability, responsiveness, and interpretability The evidence-based appraisal of the scales strengths and limitations is imperative in shaping future research, enhancing their methodological rigor, and proposing refinements to existing instruments for developmental assets.
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.